| OCR Text |
Show 8 - WINTER TIMES - DECEMBER 1993 ‘ More Letters following a circuit halfway around my new construction before exiting. I was certain of the day that it occurred and was able to place the time as likely being outside reasonable daylight hours. This was understandably upsetting to me. I documented all the facts as best I could and made several inquiries of people whom I have lmown to ride horses across my lot in an effort to identify the rider and ease my mind as to the possible motivation of the visit. I asked each to please not ride on the lower end of the lot for a while to allow me to more easily spot and identify any subsequent such visits. I also made a point not to mention this to other neighbors so as not to be the source of rumors and gossip. Scarcely a week later, with the November issue of the ‘Times’, I was more than a little upset to see a half page 4! article by Joan Sangree in which my discrete inquiry into a trespass against my privacy was somewhat twisted to meet some self-serving end Words were put into my mouth, and I was back—handedly accused of wrong doing! I am incensed! I do not usually make response to gossip, rumors or insinuations but because I was named directly and the subject twisted so far to another purpose, I feel that this demands some injection of truth for balance. Because I was, I think, so ill treated in such a public manner I feel entitled—if not obliged, to respond, even at some significant cost and effort. The title of the piece was “Beware of Assumptions” and specific points I wish to address are as follows: 1.) She implies that I inquired of her based solely on the recommendation of another whom she then refers to as “the person who advised” me. The fact is that I asked her about this based on the obvious connection that she is a horse owner who lives very near me and often rides on the outer areas of my lot (which thing I do not ordinarily mind). She was in fact the third person I asked about the incident, the order being simply a result of my waiting until I could ask her personally and privately. I was open with my information and included mention that others had suggested that I ask her also; obviously that was a mistake. 2.) She then states of my inquiry, “Concern about trespassing was not his issue. Rather the form and purpose were his concerns.” While form and purpose certainly temper the level of my concern, I think I can, and did, plainly state my W, .0 V4 1 “/ own issues—comrnon, ordinary, trespass— SB“ ing of my family’s privacy. This redefinition of my issues was then exploited as Ashley Ehlers CASTLE CANYON NURSERY Happy Holidays! Plants for the Canyon Country Landscaping Design Drip Irrigation Headquarters Sprinkler Irrigation Parts Automatic Irrigation Parts System Design St Installation 259-8274 illustrated in point 4.) to follow. She then dismissed my very real concerns with, “Chances are this horse ride was of innocent intent as was the time my new house was decorated with toilet paper streamers.” Only a fool would class an unknown person outside his young children’s bedroom at an odd hour, on an equal level of innocence with the papering of an unfinished, unoccupied, open, house frame. I always try to operate at something above the level of a fool. 3.) She then says, “What Ifound most disturbing in Robert’s question, however was the assumption of my guilt implied in his asking me to ‘try to tell the truth” (which wording implies that I did not expect her to be truthful). I did frame my question carefully, prefacing the question with the true statement that it was very difficult for me to ask her this thing, and that if it were equally difficult for her to answer that “I would appreciate an honest answer.” I was careful to not insinuate guilt, to be discrete, and make an uncomfortable circumstance easier for us both. She answered that she had not done it and I accepted that answer. We concluded with a brief friendly conversation (I thought). I have not said another word to anyone about it. 4.) By having redefined what my issue was, she then concludes that I was concerned mainly about ‘official’ snooping and seems to insinuate that maybe I have something to hide. She then makes a very thinly veiled accusation of her own! Quote, “I assumed (see title) this suggestion came from my being on the Planning Commission . . . Doing one’s job is never popular with those who have something to hide . . . Does the person who advised Robert know |
