April 23, 2006

Robert A. Callahan, Atty
Northwest Law Center
405 NW 18th Avenue
Portland OR 97209

Dear Mr. Callahan:

Just a brief note to thank you for your work in court last week on behalf of Catherine Lynne Carter, and particularly for treating me with compassion and respect. Your “evil genius” portrait of me was flattering, and a welcome change from Marti Dell’s offensive abrasiveness and Nancy Cooper’s condescending contempt. Although I shudder to think how much Catherine has spent in legal fees to avoid me and her own psychological issues, you at least returned legal value for money rather than throwing gasoline on the fire. Thank you.

I am not a reckless man and, aside from my stunt with Cate’s truck in 1999, have been more than respectful of Cate’s wishes and privacy. Until I physically saw her in court on Friday I honestly did not know how viscerally afraid of me she was, or I would have desensitized her to my existence more slowly. The drug use I referenced in my 2003 birthday letter was on Cate’s part (which is why I dodged the question) and has, I think, further retarded her psychological coping. By using drugs and working so hard to ignore me, she has complicated and intensified her own grief and guilt process. In retrospect it would have been kinder for me not to have dodged her in public as often as I did, but hindsight is sharpest.

You can share what you wish of this with your client, but my plan for the next year or so is as follows: (1) I shall be in full accordance with the court order and (2) shall modify my own behaviors only to the extent mandated by the court. I shall resume attending Reed College and other Oregon art events I have previously avoided because I thought Cate might attend, which shall increase the chances of your client seeing me in public. If I see her first, I will abide by the court order and disappear, but the initial appearance to your client may be that I am more visible than over the past six years.

I dropped enough hints in court about Cate’s psychological state and assumptions for her to have heard them if she is ready. Based on those she shall either reinforce her fears or begin to address them. Whether she reinforces the fear or deals with it, you shall probably make more money, but (3) I am open to any mediated contact with your client which she deems helpful, including sitting down with a therapist or in another safe situation of her choosing at any time. Unless your client approaches me first (4) I plan to petition for rescension, on or about one of our birthdays in some October or February to come. As noted in my 2003 birthday letter, I would welcome news of Catherine at any time, but one of those dates seems most fitting. It may be psychologically useful for her to know that contact from me will be through you at one of those two times. It is an odd coincidence that Kevin Balmer’s birthday is almost exactly the yearly anniversary of Marcus’ death. It would be interesting to know at what age and what day of the year Catherine’s mother Lynne died.

I think it has been clearly established that I can find and contact Catherine at any time I so choose, and I have long had the technical skill to cause all sorts of mayhem. The law itself can also be used as a tool for great nuisance. Given these two facts it might help your client to consider how seeming inaction may be activity on my part. Of all the times and places and ways I can or could have contacted her over the years, why have I been so precise and circumspect? Working through the various issues around Catherine in my own life, guilt over my brother and the concomitant end of my teaching career has been difficult, but I have done so without unduly imposing on Ms. Carter. The few minor communications I have made since the hearing in 1999 have been precise and bland. This is not an accident.

If I had any ill will toward Catherine it would have manifest years ago. As noted, I am not a reckless man.  If Ms. Carter’s fear increases, I suspect she will leave Oregon and the order shall be rescinded then. She is at a place where she and Kevin Balmer will need to consolidate their relationship or split and it would be relatively easy for him to work elsewhere within the CNS system, GIS or urban planning. If they split, Ms. Carter may become more fearful, and is even more likely to leave the area. If Ms. Carter actively begins to address her grief and guilt, I believe her fear will decrease and she may choose to contact me or simply not contest my petition for rescension of the order. Either outcome is equally welcome to me.

Whatever Catherine’s perception of me, I have been in counseling and psychological treatment since April 1997, immediately after my brother Marcus’ death by suicide. I was diagnosed with severe depression and began drug treatment under a psychiatrist’s supervision in April of 1998. In accordance with the current literature on this subject I have been supplementing drug treatment with other cognitive therapies, including diet and exercise. At this point, with medication, I am probably healthier than of the other principals in this case, and demonstrably so. Second only to my home and education, my mental health is the largest investment I have made. A lack of access to Cate has made this work harder, but readings of me as mentally ill are unlikely to be useful. Perhaps because of this, though, I appreciate your respect and compassion all the more.

Please share whatever of this you so choose with your client. My preferred mode of communication is postal mail, because of the cooling distance and physical record it provides. My postal address since the 1980′s is as below: Post Office Box 202, Vancouver, Washington 98666.

Thank you again for your work on behalf of Catherine and for your compassionate and respectful treatment of me.

Sincerely,

Rory Bowman
Post Office Box 202
Vancouver WA 98666