Tag Archives: Lies and Defamation

Jim Perrin’s fiefdom ?

We were at first intrigued by the spite with which ‘Melangell’ wrote of us in comments on the Guardian thread, 24/07/10, then amused by what were clearly spurious postings on other sites; finally, bored with the nonsense which was issued at every opportunity — and which we suspected to be devised entirely by Jim Perrin, using that name as an alias — we set up this site.

It is said that ‘All publicity is good publicity’ and perhaps we should have left the matter, rather than undertaking this journey in which all sign-posts point ‘West:’ but our natural wish was for the truth about our late sister’s ill-fated relationship with this author to be made known and we realised that as Jac’s sisters, we were best placed for the task.

If we do not speak, Jim Perrin’s provable lies and deceptions — his attitudinising — would go on indefinitely and this knowledge led us to overcome our reluctance and to set out on our venture: from technophobes we became twenty-first century bloggers. Continue reading →

Jim Perrin’s ‘modus operandi’ and unbalanced verbal attacks

arenigwilliams

We learnt only recently that Jim Perrin had written as his first chapter in The Climbing Essays an account of his ‘early’ relationship with our sister Jac. We know beyond doubt that this is a most exaggerated and heavily fictivised record and so much of what he has stated we have proved to be completely untrue. If only we had been aware this book was being considered before it was published, we could have taken steps earlier to expose the lies which we have shown him to have written about our sister in his introductory ‘first chapter’. If we had been able to alert the publishers to our legitimate concerns we feel sure they would not have allowed their lying author the leeway they did…

As he was unchallenged Jim Perrin ‘got away’ with his lies the first time, and he later transposed virtually the entire chapter into West but revealingly, in the chronological gap of time between the two versions, he altered his ‘story’ considerably.

*     *     *     *     *

We have said in the course of our posts that we believe, absolutely, Jim Perrin to be a liar and a fantasist, and when the second account is compared with the first we are able to show exactly how he has ’embellished’ it. Continue reading →

Analysis of anonymous letter

We sent the anonymous letter for analysis to a highly qualified and experienced professional, whose CV includes work for local councils, the Police, solicitors and the Courts to name just some of their clients and we now add their report to our site.

Whilst as a courtesy we are protecting their anonymity at this stage, they are willing if called upon to act on our behalf.

The analysis reads as follows:
[The examiner’s name.]
Certified Document Examiner and Consultant Graphologist.

10th. August 2010.

Dear [Jac’s sister],

Re.   Questioned Handwriting.

“Thank you for your letter, and for providing me with the questioned handwriting date stamped 8th. July 2005, document: reference Q-1.  You have also provided me with the following known samples of handwriting: K-1 Handwritten A5 envelope date-stamped 21st January 2005, K-2 ‘TRAVELS WITH THE FLEA’ notepaper.  (Also included were two other similar pieces of notepaper K-3 and K-4, all annotated). Continue reading →