From http://people.tribe.net/rorybowman/blog/fa8692f1-7e81-4934-80a8-66239f2fa4a4

Cate Carter lived with me for the better part of two years, moving out to focus on the latter portion of her senior year at Reed College in February of 1998. There was the usual talk of “space” and time, including a few visits to a couples counselor. I have only been in couples counseling twice, and in both cases it was pretty much divorce counseling. This was no exception, and at such a session we ended.

According to my notes I broke up with Catherine Lynne Carter at approximately 4:45 pm on Thursday, April 9, 1998. It was in the office of Tom Talbot at 1525 NE Weidler St in Portland, Oregon. A few days earlier I had declined what would be her last invitation to spend the night at her apartment because (a) I wasn’t sure the invitation came from a place of strength and (b) some vulture named Larry had been by, leaving his pot pipe on her bedstand. I remember sitting in my car with her outside of the building where we broke up, concerned about her as she discussed her anxiety about graduating from Reed on time and expressing a temptation to join her dead mother.

The next time I remember seeing Carter was at Renn Fayre in early May, when she passed me once without seeing me and then later found me, presumably out of her mind on some psychedelic. She interrupted me as I made out with another woman, then lay in my arms for the better part of twenty minutes. After her thesis orals ten days or so later, I swung by to see her, but she had not shown up at work. Concerned she may be in trouble, I went by her apartment afraid that I might smell her body as I approached, but a few phone calls showed that she had instead fled to father in California. She asked for more space and so, except for one afternoon visit at my house and a few politely banal emails, I gave her the space she wanted, asking her to contact me for my birthday in October.

Having not heard from her as expected, I sent an email to announce that I would call her on Tuesday, October 13, whereupon a creepy older woman by the name of Martitia Dell decided to step in on Cate’s behalf. Martitia Dell was, if memory serves, the youngest child in a family that did not value her achievements. Not the smartest or best looking in her family, Marti Dell became a low-rent real-estate lawyer and was generally a disappointment to everyone. Pretentiously into the local SM “scene,” Marti was old enough and lonely enough to play mother figure to Cate, a relationship encouraged by Dell’s boyfriend: Glenn A. Slate. Slate was another piece of work and retail lawyer who wanted to engage Cate in some sort of SM twaddle. The story as I heard it was that Glenn was reportedly “psychic,” carried multiple handguns and could not live in the city because the “vibrations” disturbed him. Whether Dell was Slate’s procuress or just another SM loser, I was still willing to meet with Marti, concerned what was up with Cate. On Sunday evening, October 19, Ms. Dell showed why her job involved working with papers rather than people, and why she would probably never do well at either.

I arrived with a few possessions of Cate’s to return, and am not sure exactly what Dell intended for our meeting. She opened strongly and belligerently: I would only see Cate through her, Dell explained, and if I did not like that Dell would seek a restraining order. Having had a single polite email exchange with Cate scarcely a month earlier, I was taken aback, and basically told Dell to go fuck herself, which did not endear either of us to the other.

Goodness only knows what Dell told Carter of the meeting, and to this day I do now know if Dell was acting as Carter’s attorney, Glenn’s madame, Cate’s big sister or some sort of demon stepmother. There are some people who should never take psychotropic drugs, and Cate Carter in my judgement was one of those, as was self-styled psychic cowboy Glenn Slate. I had scant idea what the heck they thought they were doing, but I was very clear after meeting with Dell that she was a nightmare and to be avoided. Dell and Slate are the sort of people I have in mind when I assert that most lawyers are neither smart nor brave. That Carter considered them trusted friends was all I ever need know of her mental state.

With friends like that, the smart money stays away. Two-legged nightmares like that are to be avoided. Bitter and offended that Carter would not only fail to check in as promised, but send such a piece of shit as emissary, I decided to send her a faux form letter I titled “the dump-o-matic.”

The dump-o-matic would not endear me to Carter…

Comment from N on Tue, April 15, 2008 – 7:20 PM

I’m not so sure this is a good idea for you to be blogging this. It’s starting to sound like a smear campaign against this woman, who obviously broke your heart. It was 1998. That’s 20 years ago. For god’s sake, let it go, man. It doesn’t matter if she’s sending lawyers and restraining orders and blogging about you now. That’s a reflection of her, not you. Don’t buy into it. Don’t get hooked into it again. It’s not worth it. Let it go.

Reply to Comment on Wed, April 16, 2008 – 8:50 AM
I am here to be myself, in all my flaws and glory.

Do you mean it’s a bad idea? I agree, which is why I have not substantively opposed or objected to her histrionic bullshit over the past ten years. It is my considered belief that Catherine Lynne Carter is not well, and that certain psychological issues she inherited with her childhood were exacerbated by drug use and bad legal advice. She comes from privilege, though, and one of the things that privilege can give one a self-centered sense of entitlement and a general lack of compassion or perspective. I had a very hard time after she left me, mostly from exhaustion from over-work and chronic pain, capped by the suicide of my youngest brother. Carter left me because I was not well, but even in the worst of my condition I honored her dignity and privacy over my own, as a clear documentary record shows.

When Carter asked me in June of 1998 to return certain small personal items of hers, I did so, and she suspected me of sending her a mail bomb. When she emailed to ask what was in the package, I told her and she had it returned as “refused.” I then used a truck key she had given me to return a large and ugly sofa she had also left and never picked up, whereupon she told a judge that use of her valuable property was next door to threatening her life, and tried to get me legally branded in court in a way which would complicate my professional life, despite a total lack of violence or property damage or threats of either on my part. She certainly failed to mention to the judge that, for the twenty miles I put on her truck returning her property, I put five dollars (a bit over three gallons) of gas.

My vocational degrees are in criminal justice and education, industries with routine and constant background checks. By selecting an accusation that lumped me with cowardly woman-beaters, she insulted me gravely. By playing to every pretty-white-girl versus crazy-veteran stereotype, she offended me on levels she does not even understand. I don’t think she is smart or ruthless enough to have done this on purpose, yet she did. And for years I have taken it, seen her around town, mostly ignored her, and been silent. When she drug me into court again (after seeing me on the *internet* of all places), and I gave the legal system a chance to do the right thing. With fair warning and announcing my intentions, I shall do so again. There is no dishonor in losing a fair fight, but only in cheating to win.

I have repeatedly contacted her lawyer and consistently been ignored. My original point to Ms. Dell so many years ago was that human decency was a greater protection than the law, and that the fundamental power of the state was to imprison or kill. If Carter wanted to play the legal game, she had best be prepared to see me imprisoned or killed, because the message that sends is that I am a bad person who can only be dealt with through force. Bullshit.

Are you familiar with a 1964 book called “Games People Play?” Carter is a second-degree player running games such as “Courtroom” and “If It Werent’ For You” and “Let’s You and Him Fight.” Dell is fond of sexualized power games and classic Karpman drama triangles, but very inept. I try very hard not to play games, but have now begun a third-degree game of “Now I’ve Got You, You Son of a Bitch.” By calling my shots before I make them, I demonstrate my skill and regain my sense of agency. My plan has never been to look good, but to be good: Oὐκ ἔστιν ἀνδρὶ ἀγαθῳ̂ κακὸν, eh?

Martitia Dell is a feckless daughter of privilege who parlayed her class position into a law degree which she pretty much uses to paper over her place on the planet and to aggrandize herself well beyond her merit. I think that right now she is selling fire places for her boyfriend’s business under the lofty title of “general counsel,” which is a good place for her given the downturn in the hot tub and home-spa sales industry.

I assure you that I am quite aware of how this shall make me seem, and I have no intention of making myself look better than I am. I am not here to make friends but to be myself, to tell my story, and to let the cards fall where they may.

Do you know the poetry of Stephen Crane? He is most famous for his stories and short novels, but a line from a poem of his became the title of a race-novel by Joyce Carol Oates. I have thought of that poem over the past two years, as I consider who I am and what I can do, reviewing who I’ve been and what I *have* done. My silence has covered craven idiocy and the failures of privilege long enough. If these people want to play games of insinuation, reputation and law, fair enough. Cry havoc and let us all observe that, in matters of libel, truth is an absolute defense. From Stephen Crane:

In the desert
I saw a creature, naked, bestial,
Who, squatting upon the ground,
Held his heart in his hands,
And ate of it.
I said: “Is it good, friend?”
“It is bitter-bitter,” he answered;
“But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart.”

Comment from S on Sat, April 19, 2008 – 7:43 AM
compassion

Ah my friend, I had no idea what you had been going through….
I knew you were bitter and tough, but not why, not really.
I am sorry you were hurt. by all the women in your life, (including me -unintentionally) and by your brother…
You know you were in the right… they may never admit it. even if a court of law tells them so.
take a deep breath and look around you at what you do have now.
chickens, green trees, freedom, and a beautiful woman who really does love you.
I do understand the value of lancing the poison of the past. and wanting to get it down for posterity…
and you may well say F*%#@ compassion! (for them).
sometimes this kind of thing is like cutting on yourself to feel better (trust me, I’m spinning on the rotisserie of my own percieved guilt
and angst.. after losing James.. on a daily basis… funny how seeing someone else doing it makes it look so much more clear.)
My dear friend, thank-you for being there for me when things have been difficult, more than once.
and do look at all this it from another angle, and give yourself compassion.
give yourself permission to purge this from your system with your writing, don’t let it poison you again. (by giving them your attention, a fight, a focus, you give them your power )
and remember that no matter how badly the universe has treated you by hooking you up with these creatures,
you are strong, you are beautiful, you are loved.
(and you know how to make kick-ass salsa and brandied pears!)

Reply to Comment Sat, April 19, 2008 – 5:00 PM
Hurt by women? No. That was me.

I don’t feel that I’ve been hurt by all the women in my life, and both of these are really beneath bothering to hurt. At this point it is mainly my pride and that can be cleared up in court. Other than perhaps an apology there is nothing I could want from her, and I don’t think that she is capable of that. Their punishment is to be them, as my honor is to be me. At this point is just a matter of clearly establishing position and finishing up the paperwork.

I feel stupid to have so drastically over-judged Kate, but her hour of promise has passed. May both of them live very long lives, so that their worth is crystalline clear. I did some stupid things, but nothing I felt was dishonorable.

Oὐκ ἔστιν ἀνδρὶ ἀγαθῳ κακὸν, eh? “No evil can befall a good man.”

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

CATHERINE CARTER, Petitioner,
vs.
RAIN RORY GREY BOWMAN, Respondent.

Case No.: 99-0708238

Portland, Oregon
August 20, 1999
1:30 p.m.

TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING
BEFORE THE HONORABLE DAVID SMEDEMA
MULTNOMAH COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE

APPEARANCES:

For the Petitioner:    Nancy Cooper, 121 SW Morrison Street, 11th floor, Portland, Oregon 97204, 503-228-3939

For the Respondent:    Rory Bowman, pro se, P.O. Box 202, Vancouver, WA 98666, 360-695-6929

Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording; transcript produced by transcription service.

INDEX

OPENING STATEMENTS:

On behalf of Petitioner, by Ms. Cooper

On behalf of Respondent, by Rory Bowman

WITNESSES FOR PETITIONER:    DIRECT     CROSS     RE-DIRECT    RE-CROSS

Martitia M. Dell            4        6        N/A        N/A

Catherine Carter            11        15        20        21

WITNESSES FOR RESPONDENT:

Rory Bowman            22        25        N/A        N/A

ARGUMENT:    Ms. Cooper                            26

RESPONSE:        Rory Bowman                        27

THE COURT: Let’s go to matters which have counsel. Carter then, and Bowman. I’ll hear that one. There was, it looks like, a temporary order issued after a hearing August second and uh…

MR. BOWMAN: Excuse me, Your Honor. There is an order issued?

THE COURT: There is a temporary protective order, yes, issued August second that runs until today.

MR. BOWMAN; Oh, is that part of the original subpoena I was issued?  I had been notified of nothing until I received that subpoena.

THE COURT: Uh, that subpoena was given to you after this order was entered, yes, setting this hearing and telling you of your, your right to appear and contest it. Alright, on behalf of Carter then, the attorney, your name and bar number.

MS. COOPER: Nancy Cooper, 95328.

THE COURT: Do you have any opening statement or summary?

PETITIONER’S OPENING STATEMENT

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, this is a relationship that ended, over a year ago but despite many requests to have no contact, Mr. Bowman has continued to contact my client in an escalating threatening manner. He has made statements such that if she were to get an order such as this that she should be prepared to either have the police shoot him or he would take her out with him. Uh, my client is in fear for her safety. Most recently he took her truck from her apartment parking lot, loaded a package that had been returned to him, loaded a sofa and returned the truck without letting her know any of this was happening which placed her in fear because he had obviously managed to find out where she lived. He is unpredictable, an unpredictable temper, and she is in fear for her safety.

THE COURT: Alright, and your first witness, they can testify from there if she wishes to.

MS. COOPER: My first witness will be Marti Dell.

THE COURT: Alright. Come forward.

MARTITIA DELL, PETITIONER’S WITNESS, SWORN

THE COURT: Be seated, give your full name.

MS. DELL: My full name is Martitia, M-A-R-T-I-T-I-A, Mary, M-A-R-Y, Dell. I go by Marti.

THE COURT: And spell your last name.

MS. DELL: Dell, D-E-L-L.

THE COURT: Counsel, go ahead.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY NANCY COOPER:

Q.    Ms. Dell, uh,would you state your occupation and address for the record?

A.    I am a lawyer and my address is 102 <inaudible>

Q.    No, your professional, your office address.

A.    242 Southwest <inaudible> Avenue, Portland, Oregon 972<inaudible>.

Q.    Thank you. Do you know Catherine Carter?

A.    Yes I do.

Q.    How do you know her?

A.    She’s a friend.

Q.    Has she also been a client?

A.    She has.

Q.    Do you know Rory, Rory Grey Bowman?

A.    I do.

Q.    And how do you know him?

A.    I know him as the former boyfriend of Ms. Carter.

Q.    Did you ever have occasion to meet with Mr. Bowman regarding Ms. Carter?

A.    Yes, I did.

Q.    Could you tell the court about that meeting?

A.    Uh, if I remember correctly it was in October of last year and Ms. Carter had talked to me about contact from Mr. Bowman and I offered to meet with him to request that he leave her alone. We discussed the manner in which I was going to do that. And, um, we decided that I would do it in a friendly manner to start with and depending on how he responded, potentially I would tell him that I was her attorney and I would tell him that she wanted no further contact with him at all.

Q.    Did you make that statement to him?

A.    I ended up making that at the end of the meeting, yeah, but that was not how it started out.

Q.    And how did he respond?

A.    He responded increasingly hostilely. He was very threatening. I said that Ms. Carter did not want to get a restraining order or anything of that sort but she wanted to just amiably part and he said that if she did that first of all, it wouldn’t stop him and, second of all there was nothing left for him to behave for, and she just better watch out before doing that.

Q.    Did he make any comments regarding how he would react to the police?

A.    If I remember correctly, he stated that he would do something very close to lethal force.

Q.    Did you feel that this was a legitimate threat?

A.    Yes I did.

Q.    Why?

A.    I had known Mr. Bowman for as long as I had known Ms. Carter and um, before this <inaudible> seemed very irrational and he seemed very angry and very uh, very certain of what he would do. He seemed determined.

Q.    I have nothing else, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Bowman, then, do you have any questions of Ms. Dell?

CROSS EXAMINATION BY RORY BOWMAN:

Q.    At any point during the conversation, Ms. Dell, did you say anything about being her attorney or anything about representing her or was that merely implied by my language?

A.    If I remember correctly, at the end of our conversation I told you I was her attorney and to no longer contact her.

Q.    Was there anyone else present for that conversation?

A.    Yes there was.

Q.    Who would that be?

A.    Uh, her name is Sarah Perrault.

Q.    How do you know Ms. Perrault?

A.    She also is an acquaintance of yours, so I have not had much contact with her.

Q.    So did you meet her before or after you met Ms, Carter?

A.    Before.

Q.    What can you tell me about Ms. Perrault and her general tolerance for abusive behavior or threats towards women…?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I don’t see the relevance. I object.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection. Do you have other questions?

Q.    Um, do you believe that Ms. Perrault would also agree that I was

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I object.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection. It calls for speculation.

Q.    Um, was there anything other than my general manner and, that made you think that I was threatening you in any way?

A.    I’m not sure I understand the question.

Q.    Did I raise my voice?

A.    Yes.

Q.    What did I say when you claim I raised my voice?

A.    Uh, seeing how this conversation was almost a year ago I don’t remember your exact words but yes, you did raise your voice to me.

Q.    So do you think that Ms. Perrault would also testify that I raised my voice?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I object.

THE COURT: I will sustain the objection as already been asked and answered.

Q.    Okay. Where did this meeting take place?

A.    It occurred at Divine Mocha on Grand and approximately Broadway. I don’t remember exactly <inaudible>

Q.    Okay. How many other people were there in the room at the time the conversation took place?

A.    I don’t remember.

Q.    Where there more than 5?

A.    I don’t remember. My back was to the room.

Q.    I thought you were facing south looking at me.

A.    I was facing you the corner.

Q.    Okay. I was in the corner of the room. So, would you say there were at least possibly half a dozen people in the room?

A.    I told you I don’t remember.

Q.    Okay. Which with you and I and Ms. Perrault there were at least five?

A.    Correct.

Q.    So it would not be unreasonable to think there at least a half dozen people there?

A.    I suppose.

Q.    Do you think that any of them would have noticed that I raised my voice?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I object. Speculation.

THE COURT: Sustain the objection.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay. I guess I am not exactly sure how this works, your honor. I had no idea it was going to be this legal. I thought it was going to be like a traffic hearing.

THE COURT: I don’t know what your questions are. I can’t advise you. I don’t practice law privately. I hear the cases so I can’t tell you what to do here.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay, I guess my point would be that, in my opinion, and I believe that Ms. Perrault would agree with this, Ms. Dell came in not at all happily. She came in very confrontive.

THE COURT: Well, you can testify later if you choose to do that. That’s totally up to you but now you are starting to argue facts I haven’t heard yet.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay.

/////

THE COURT: The sequence of things: they’ll put on witnesses then you can put on witnesses then I’ll allow each other very short closing comments and I’ll decide the case.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay. I had not known about witnesses.

Q.    Do you consider yourself to have good people skills, Ms. Dell?

A.    Uh, I’m not sure what you mean by “people skills.”

Q.    Do you think that, when you interact with people do they perceive you the way you want to be perceived?

A.    I have no idea. Most of the time I get the results that I want and I am effecive.

Q.    Did you intend, on that evening to come, in combative and offensive?

A.    I never intended to be combative and offensive. However, being an attorney, I certainly came in with an attitude of representing my client.

Q.    So your basic position that evening was representing your client?

A.    Absolutely.

Q.    And was oppositional?

A.    I wouldn’t say that.

Q.    Adversarial?

A.    I suppose, if you consider it that way. I did not consider it to be adversarial.

Q.    In the gist of your remarks, did you say that I had no business requesting to speak with Ms, Carter?

A.    I don’t recall.

Q.    Does the phrase “why should she grant you a meeting” sound familiar? Would that fit? Is that something you might have said?

A.    Sure.

Q.    Do you think it’s something you did say?

A.    I don’t remember.

MR. BOWMAN: Um, Excuse me Your Honor, are we sticking to this meeting as the only thing on the table?

THE COURT: I don’t think I understand your question.

Q.    Ms, Dell, do you know of any, and what sorts of contact I’ve had with Ms. Carter over the last year? Oh, let’s say two years. She graduated in May of 98.

A.    I could not tell you other than that email.

Q.    Have I seen her ever physically within the last 14 months? Ever? To your knowledge?

A.    To my knowledge: the last 14 months would be August; that would be August that would be June. Yes. Not personally that I was there but I understand from her telling me was that yes you have.

Q.    Okay. How many times and under what circumstances?

A.     I have no idea.

Q.    Would one of the times be when she came to my house?

THE COURT: You are asking her to speculate. She started to answer that based on pretty much a guess.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay.

THE COURT: That’s not very fruitful for what I am trying to decide.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay. Um, I’m not sure how, we, if there were no objection. Hmm.  Would counsel be willing to stipulate that I’ve seen Ms. Carter twice in the last 14 months?  Once when she came to my house to see some kittens and the second time in passing at Fred Meyer last January?

MS. COOPER: No, Your Honor, I am not willing to stipulate. I don’t have that information. I’ve not spoken to my client to get specifics on when she’s seen him or not. Part of our contention is that he has been contacting her and as she will testify and I mentioned in my opening statement that there were times that he has been around her property that she doesn’t even know about. So, she doesn’t know whether he’s seen her and she isn’t aware of it or not. So, no, I’m not willing to stipulate.

THE COURT: Any other questions of this witness?

MR. BOWMAN: Oh, um, I’m wondering when I’m going to do. I’m not a lawyer. I’m not even a caveman like on SNL who has fallen into some ice. No further questions. It seems like pretty much a done deal.

THE COURT: No redirect?

MS. COOPER: I have no further questions your honor.

THE COURT: You may step down.

MS. COOPER: I call Catherine Carter, Your Honor and ask that she be allowed to testify from here.

CATHERINE CARTER, PETITIONER’S WITNESS, SWORN

THE COURT: Give your full name, spell your last.

MS. CARTER: Catherine Lynne Carter, C-A-R-T-E-R Is my last name. I spell Catherine C-A-T-H-E-R-I-N-E.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. COOPER:

Q.    Ms. Carter, do you go by any nicknames?

A.    No.

Q.    Do you live in Multnomah County?

A.    I do.

Q.    Do you know Mr. Bowman?

A.    Yes.

Q.    How?

A.    Uh, Mr. Bowman, um, and I, were very much in love.  We lived together at his residence for two months.

Q.    Is this a current relationship?

A.    No it is not

Q.    When did it end?

A.    I’d say it was officially over by the middle of April.

Q.    Had you separated prior to that?

A.    Yes, I moved out of his residence on uh, February 15, 1998.

Q.    Have you had contact with Mr. Bowman since the relationship ended?

A.    Yes.

Q.    Would you explain that contact to the court?

A.    After I moved out of the house, we occasionally corresponded by email.

Q.    Let’s take the email.

A.    Okay.

Q.    You said they started out friendly.

A.    Yes.

Q.    When did that tone change?

A.    Um, late summer of 1998. The emails began to be concerning to me.

Q.    Can you describe them?

A.    Um, Mr. Bowman was becoming increasingly angry about the ending of the relationship and he didn’t understand why it ended. Um, I didn’t have anything to tell him. He was not satisfied with my answers. I asked him to um, give me time.

Q.     Did you ask Ms. Dell for help?

A.    Yes. Marti is my friend. I asked her for help because I didn’t know how to make him stop and I wanted her opinion on what was going to be the best way to end communication.  I didn’t…I felt like Mr. Bowman clearly felt there was resolution and I wanted to satisfy his desire for closure and just get on with my life.

Q.    Did the context change?

A.    There was a period of uh, about eight months where I didn’t have contact with Mr. Bowman. Then in late July of this year um, I received an email from Mr. Bowman, one line, that said if you have anything to say to me, do it soon. Within two days I received a call from my parents. I spoke with my father, a package had arrived addressed to me at my parents’ house in La Jolla from Mr. Bowman and they wanted to know what I wanted them to do with it. There was discussion about what was in the package, if I knew what it was and what was going on. There were concerns about what might be in the package because I had no idea what it was. What me and my family decided to do was return the package to sender. I responded to Mr. Bowman’s email saying that this is not how I want to remember you: please just don’t contact me and don’t contact my parents. If you have to contact me, contact my attorney. He wrote back an accusatory email, accused me basically of ruining his life, and I became extremely frightened at this point and left my home. I stayed with friends. When I returned home to feed my cat and take care of some personal business I found that my pickup truck was sitting in my apartment parking lot with a sofa that a friend had given me while I was living with him sitting in the back of it, and the same package that he sent to my parents sitting on the driver’s seat. At that point I called the police, um, and, they came and the package was opened. It contained some personal effects of Mr. Bowman and a few items of mine that I had left at the house when I left that I didn’t know were still there., At that point I felt that my security and my safety had been violated to a point that I was not going to be able to reside at that address. I felt very threatened.

Q.    Why?

A.    Um, up until that point the communication had been, it had been annoying and concerning but it wasn’t scary. It was actually about physical things. It was like, Mr. Bowman took something of mine, something that had a lot of value, to prove that he could do it.

Q.    Is there any behavior in the history with Mr. Bowman that caused concern?

A.    Yes. It is my opinion that Mr. Bowman has a rather short and violent temper. When he is angry I have seen him break different objects: from breaking pencils to ripping apart books to ripping a pair of jeans to breaking glasses. I feel that there is some instability in his behavior in the female realm. He made several references to suicide, and I feel that there are issues, that lead me to believe he may not be stable at this time.

Q.    Do you fear for your personal safety?

A.    I do.

Q.    Why?

A.    I feel that, if someone can’t control their temper, that is a really disturbing sign of what could happen. I feel like my things of great value that belong to me and were taken without my permission. And it disturbs me. The most basic personal property is my body and beyond that the things that belong to a person are theirs. If you can violate my personal property to the point of taking my car, I don’t know where things could escalate to, but I feel they are escalating.

MS. COOPER: I have no further questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT:  Mr. Bowman: questions? do you have any?

CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. BOWMAN:

Q.    Ms. Carter, did you ever give me any keys to any of your items you would consider personal property?

A.    Yes, you had the keys to the truck at one point in time.

Q.    Okay. And any other keys besides the truck?

A.    No.

Q.    Was there an apartment on Hawthorne that I had the keys to?

A.    At one point in time, yes, that was Fall of 98.

Q.    Okay. And do you have a key, and at one point did you know the alarm code to my house?

A.    Yes.

Q.    And what was that code that I gave you at that time?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I object. It’s not relevant.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.

Q.    Um, at one point the code to my alarm system at my house was your birthday, was it not Ms. Carter?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, I fail to see the relevance. I object.

THE COURT:  What’s the relevance?

MR. BOWMAN: The relevance is that at the time she moved out I told her the code would stay the same unless I told her I was going to change it. I have not changed it. At the time she gave me the key, she gave me the key to her truck saying that she’d like me to have a key in case I ever needed it. I’m not sure this crosses the line…

THE COURT: I’ll allow her to answer the question.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay.

A.    I would like to first state that I don’t remember making that statement, although I may. And I believe that not talking to someone for a year, he’s no longer, I don’t believe that gives him the right to take, to take the vehicle. Even if he still had a key.

THE COURT: You did give him the key at one time and you did have the code to his apartment?

MS. CARTER: I did at one time, yes.

THE COURT: Okay. Any more questions?

Q.    Um, did you ever at any point ask me to return the key or return any of your personal property?

A.    I do not believe so.

Q.    Did you ever ask me to return a small rice bowl with a jade plant at one time?

A.    I don’t remember asking for that, no.

Q.    You don’t recall a conversation wherein you gave me a jade plant and said if I ever moved it from the bowl you wanted the bowl?

A.    I don’t remember that, no.

Q.    Would you be willing to testify it was something you might have said?

MS. COOPER: Your Honor, Objection. He’s asked the question three times and she’s obviously…

THE COURT: Sustained. Another question.

Q.    If there were items of yours I had and I needed to return to you, but I’ve been asked not to contact you what would be the logical way to do so?

A.     The logical way to do would be to contact Ms. Dell who was acting as my attorney and ask her what she, ask her to contact me and find out what I wanted her to do.

Q.    What would be another way I could that without contacting Ms. Dell?

A.    You could have contacted a third party. You could have contacted a friend.

Q.    Would mailing things to a permanent address, a thousand miles away from you be the same as contacting a third party to you?

MS. COOPER: Objection, relevance.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.

Q.    Would it have been reasonable for me to think, even though I had not contacted you and I didn’t know whether or not you had moved since you last invited me to your apartment…

THE COURT: You’re starting to ask long extended and argumentative questions. This is a fact-finding stage.

Q.    Ms. Carter, would you agree that mailing something to your parents’ address in California where your father lives would be a reasonable way to return the items asked for?

A.    I don’t know.

THE COURT: Okay, next question.

Q.    Given that your first choice involved dealing with someone who I found to be  confrontive, um, deceptive, manipulative, and incompetent, um, and choosing to…

THE COURT: I’ll strike that question.

MS. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Please sir, I want light. I do not want heat. If you cannot deal with the kind of questions you should ask, I’ll ask you to leave and I’ll decide the case in your absence.

MR. BOWMAN: Okay.

THE COURT: This is not a time to be smart. This is not a time to be dismissive of the people on the other side. I am trying to give both of you the fairest hearing I can but it gets tougher and tougher when you keep asking those types of questions.

Q.    Is it reasonable to believe that you may have given me a key one time that you can’t remember and that you had asked for the return of the bowl at one time?

MS. COOPER: Objection, Your Honor. Those questions have been asked and answered.

THE COURT: Asked and answered, yeah. I’ll sustain the objection. You can’t continue to ask the same questions.

Q.    Ms. Carte:  except for the time I recently took your truck to return you your sofa, to your knowledge have I ever gone to your apartment unless I was explicitly invited by you?

A.    No.

Q.    To your knowledge, what was I doing professionally when you first met me?

A.    When I first met you, you were working as a member of the campus security office at Reed College.

Q.    Okay. I was a security officer. And, what was I doing when I moved out?

A.    You were teaching elementary school, I’m sorry, middle school at Gaiser Middle School in Vancouver.

Q.    Does it seem likely to you that working in security on a residential campus or teaching Middle School would be frustrating jobs at times?

MS. COOPER: Objection, Your Honor, calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q.    To your knowledge have I ever struck another person in anger?

A.    Not to my knowledge.

Q.    To your knowledge have I ever physically threatened any person?

A.    Depending upon your definition of physical threats, yes.

Q.    Okay. What would you consider a physical threat that I may have made?

A.    I am referring to an incident involving [Kaleb Napoli], in which he was standing on the porch at Reed college talking to a professor, at which point you walked up beside him and he became concerned for his safety.

Q.    So, what was the threat I made in that instance?

A.    I believe you commented to me that you would use your elbow, and that he was concerned by your presence.

Q.    So I have never threatened anyone that you know of. I have never struck anyone that you know of?

MS. COOPER: Objection, Your Honor, already asked and answered.

Q,    Other than Ms. Dell’s comments, do you have any reason to believe I might be threatening towards you?

A.    You stated in an email that you feel you have nothing left to lose.

Q.    Um, and that’s a threat?

A.    It was creepy.

MR. BOWMAN: No further questions.

THE COURT: Any other questions?

Ms. COOPER: I have just a couple re-direct, Your Honor.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. COOPER:

Q.    What was the nature of your relationship when you gave the key to Mr. Bowman?

A.    We were romantic partners.

Q.    Why would you give your partner a key?

A.    At the time we would originally borrow each other’s cars on errands. I think that it is possible that this situation was one where he used it to pick up a desk or something like that.

Q.    When you gave him the key did you intend for him to use it after the relationship ended?

A.    No.

MS. COOPER: I have no other questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you have any other witnesses?

MS. COOPER: I would like to recall Ms. Dell very briefly, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Can you stand and testify from the table there?

Ms. DELL: Yes, sir.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. COOPER:

Q.    Ms. Dell, do you have any knowledge regarding Mr. Bowman contacting Ms. Carter, uninvited?

A.    Yes.

Q.    Could you relate that to the court?

A.    Um, my recollection is that Mr. Bowman called my house and left a voicemail on my machine that he was very concerned that Ms. Carter was not at home and had not been at home for two or three days, that he had stopped by to find out, and that she wasn’t there and she hadn’t contacted him to tell him why she had gone, and this was after the relationship had already ended and, did I know where she was.

MS. COOPER: I have no further questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. No other witnesses?

MS. COOPER: No, no other witnesses.

THE COURT: Mr. Bowman? What?

MR. BOWMAN: Can I touch on redirect?

THE COURT: If you are dealing with that sole…

MR. BOWMAN: That sole issue?

THE COURT: Those one or two questions, yes.

RE-CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. BOWMAN:

Q.    To the best of your recollection, Ms. Dell, was this after she had possibly not graduated from college, and did I say at the time that she did not show up for work?

MS. COOPER: Objection, Your Honor, that was not, um, I did not address what was going on…

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.

Q.    Um, did you, um, did we find Ms. Carter at that point?

A.    At that point?

Q.    Um, I mean after that incident?

A.    I’m not quite sure. Did you or I find her?

Q.    Yes, yeah, there wasn’t a call made to her father after I talked to you?

A.    I did not make a call, no.

Q.    You don’t remember a follow up call to her father?

MS. COOPER: Objection, Your Honor, asked and answered.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection. Mr. Bowman, did you wish to testify or call any witnesses? It’s your choice.

MR. BOWMAN: If I could testify <inaudible> that would be great.

RORY BOWMAN, RESPONDENT’S WITNESS, SWORN

THE COURT: Give your full name and spell your last.

MR. BOWMAN: Rain Rory Grey Bowman, B-O-W-M-A-N

THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.

DIRECT EXAM/TESTIMONY BY RORY BOWMAN:

A.    Um, Ms. Carter left under ambiguous circumstances and left some property with me, including a particular rice bowl that she said was important and a couch which I found particularly ugly and didn’t care for, as well as the key to her truck, the return of which she never asked. At the meeting with Ms. Dell, I found Ms. Dell to be confrontive and basically  looking for a fight. I brought a mutual acquaintance who agreed with that assessment at the time.  Um, I felt that…

THE COURT: I’m more interested in what you did, not why you did it.

MR. BOWMAN: About what I did?

THE COURT: You heard me. Talk about what the issues are. People seem to want to run the field.

A.    Okay. I had items, I had the bowl…

THE COURT: You said you had a couch, rice bowl and the truck key. What did you do with them?

A.    I returned them because I was planning… I wanted her to have them.

THE COURT: Did you tell her or her attorney that you were going to do that?

A.    I did not.

THE COURT: Why was that?

A.    Because the package was returned refused and I found her attorney to be a prude, a confrontive jerk who was probably misrepresenting her. The attorney in question is Ms. Dell. So I returned the items and that was going to be the end of it. <crying> At no point did I threaten her or anything other than my own death.

THE COURT: Did you ever hit her?

A.    What?

THE COURT: Have you ever struck her?

A.    No.

THE COURT: Have you ever told her you were going to hit her?

A.    No.

THE COURT: Do you carry uh, any kind of weapons at all?

A.    No.

THE COURT: What about when you were a security guard? Did you have a gun in the house?

A.    I have no firearms.

THE COURT: So you’re a campus police so you are unarmed?

A.    Correct.

THE COURT: Did you carry a baton or anything like that?

A.    At the time I began they did not. By the time I left we had handcuffs and mace, or rather capsicum.

THE COURT: When you left the car to pick up the couch and the package did you leave a note with it of any kind?

A.    No, I just left the package there.

THE COURT: In the pickup?

A.    In the pickup on the driver’s seat where it would be very obvious from outside the car.

THE COURT: What did you do with the key?

A.    I still have the key.

THE COURT: You didn’t like lock it in the vehicle or mail it to her or something?

A.    It didn’t occur to me to do that, but I could. I meant to bring it here today but I was running late. But that doesn’t matter.

THE COURT: You don’t carry it on a keychain like most people would.

A.    Uh, no, not other people’s keys I keep it in a drawer in my kitchen cabinet. If I carried all the keys people have given me to their houses and cars and stuff I’d go through more trousers than I do.

THE COURT: Do you have any keys to other apartments or vehicles of hers or anything else of hers remaining.

A. All those things were in the truck.

THE COURT: Okay, besides these items, it sounds like the package of miscellaneous items, I mean you kept your clothes and personal belongings and she kept hers?

/////

A.    Yes.  I met her because someone had broken into her truck. Originally I thought there was a certain component of closure in returning her truck and her ugly sofa and the package she asked me to send her months before. It was poetic.

THE COURT: I imagine one person’s poetry is another person’s cacaphony. But be that as it may, do you have any questions, counsel?

MS. COOPER: Yes, Your Honor.

CROSS EXAMINATION BY MS. COOPER:

Q.    Um, Mr. Bowman, you were told not to contact Ms. Carter, weren’t you?

A.    Um, I was asked not to call her which I didn’t. I was asked not to contact her by Ms. Dell and I sent email to her and Ms. Dell simultaneously because I did not trust Ms. Dell’s account of Carter’s views or preferences.

Q.    Ms. Dell asked you not to contact Mr. Carter, or, Ms. Carter, is that correct?

A.    Uh, that is not my recollection of the conversation and I do remember much more of the conversation that Ms. Dell does.

Q.    And this meeting occurred in October of 1998, is that correct?

A.    Um, yeah, I think it was August of 1998 but I’m not sure of the exact month.

Q.    And the incident where you took the truck and returned the package and stuff occurred in July of 1999, is that correct?

A.    Correct.

Q.    You broke an item against the wall in anger before, haven’t you?

A.    Uh, I don’t recall any but I’ll tell you something I would do. I know I would throw a lot of the glass into the recycling bin in anger.

Q.    You’ve thrown other things in anger, too?

/////

A.    I’ve thrown pencils. When I was teaching fourth grade in New Orleans I threw an eraser.

MS. COOPER: I have nothing else, Your Honor.

MR. BOWMAN: at a blackboard…

THE COURT: The summation then, Ms. Cooper?

MS. COOPER: Very briefly, Your Honor.

CLOSING ARGUMENT

MS. COOPER: We have here a situation of a relationship that ended in early 1998. Mr. Bowman was asked repeatedly not to contact Ms. Carter. He continued to contact her. He acknowledges the meeting happened in the Fall of 98 and he makes it sound like it was just oh so convenient that he chose to end the relationship and return everything, just wash everything off and everything was clean.  However, eight, nine months ago and he just now in July decided to return everything. After having no contact these eerie emails started to appear. He appears at her apartment and takes her truck, loads things in it and then takes it back but then fails to return her key. He thought it poetic justice that he was putting the truck back because that’s how he met her and yet he has a problem with anger; he throws erasers while teaching fourth grade; he’s broken things against the wall and obviously placed my client in reasonable fear, that objective reasonable fear that she has reason to be afraid of his behavior and his constant contact and intentions even after she requested that he not contact her. And we are requesting that the Court issue a permanent stalking order. Thank you.

THE COURT: Any uh, summary you want to make, Mr. Bowman?

/////

RESPONSE

MR. BOWMAN: I’ve never gone to Ms. Carter’s apartment uninvited with the exception of this one time with the truck, which I thought fell within the realm of “if I never need it.”  When she asked me to stop phoning, I stopped phoning. I did ignore her request to move all communications through Ms. Dell because I did not believe Ms. Dell would pass them along. Um, I tried to responsibly return key items by mailing them to her father’s house because I promised I would. That’s reasonable. <crying>. I don’t particularly want to see her again. One way or the other, by her conduct, she has shown herself irrational. I think that Ms. Carter frightens very easily and has found two sympathetic characters who will get all motherly and protective against the big bad boogey man. I haven’t stalked anybody in 25 years. There is no reasonable fear. There is no reason for further contact. Besides screwing with my criminal record, such an order will accomplish nothing. And, given that I’ve worked in criminal justice and the public schools, my criminal record is important.

FINDINGS AND ORDER

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Bowman, I would, I guess I will start out by saying that you are not the first and  you’re not the last person that I am going to see in a court room proceeding who had difficulty handling the breakup of a relationship. And you don’t have no business having any kind of contact at all with Ms. Carter. And when I order that in, as I do in some types of cases, I tell people very directly you don’t call them, don’t write them, you don’t email them. You don’t do that to friends, you don’t do that to third parties, no contact means zero and that’s exactly where you should be, based on everything that I know and everything that you have told me.

I would have to find there’s not sufficient basis for me to issue a protective order that’s of full term, unlimited duration. It’s not an easy breakup but I don’t think the facts substantiate all the elements under the stalking statute so I’ll be dismissing the matter. I am doing a couple of things, though and you’ll get a copy of this order. One is you are ordered to return the key to the truck by mail by a week from today by mailing to the office of Ms. Cooper. Ms. Cooper will give you a business card or something else that has her mailing address. And I understand, I assume from everything you’ve told me that’s all there is left in this relationship and that you are advised that if you fail to do that then you can be found in contempt. I would have no problem that. I mean If I have to call you back in here and find you in contempt because you didn’t do a simple thing like put a key in an envelope and mail it then you need to be aware that I have the authority to put you in jail up to six months and fine you $500 or both. I would not hesitate to do wither one of those. Get a copy of the order. Shoot him a business card. Thank you all.

AUDIO RECORDING TRANSCRIBED BY JENNIFER ZAMMETTI, TRANSCRIBER

Personal journal entry from 19oct98, following the meeting wherein Marti Dell threatened a bogus restraining order and Bowman advised her that involving the legal system was an escalation to lethal force and one that should not be taken unless Carter was at a point where she was ready to kill me or see me killed. The context for this conversation was a June promise by Carter to exchange letters by my birthday in early October, which Dell had apparently discouraged. I had been awaiting Carter’s letter to write and send mine, formally closing the romantic period in our relationship. As part of counseling for depression triggered by the death of my brother Marcus, I was addressing an overwhelming sense of failure, and trying to bring loose ends such as the formal, final exchange with Carter to a close. Most of my other journal entries at this time are very much “one day at a time” about the challenges of simply staying alive within a major depression. SMP is a friend who was caring for me during this time, who had introduced Marti Dell to Kate in the first place.

Your pompous lawyer
threatened me with paper
as if paper could stop me
when I daily pray for death.

Well, it can,
one paper:
your letter.

Met with Marti last night about Kate and she was pompous, heavy-handed and unskilled, getting angry with me and grossly miscalculating where I was and what I was about. Marti is neither a skilled negotiator, nor very smart. Kate has many problems, but they don’t come from me, and Marti had grossly miscalculated where I am.

Marti immediately took issue with my attitude, asking me why I felt I deserved a meeting, then implying that I wouldn’t get one if I didn’t cave and kiss her ass. I explained that I could force a meeting (holding back that it could be at any time and circumstance I chose) and she said she could file a restraining order. I shook my head and chortled, telling her that she had no basis for an order and asking her where she thought such an action would go. I told her that false accusations to invoke the police were an immediate escalation to lethal force, explaining that she should only file one if she was ready to kill me, because anything short of my death assumed my cooperation.

Marti is a pompous, self-important, meddler. Old, ugly and jealous, she is making herself more important to this than necessary, keeping Kate from mailing letters that she wanted to. We were able to negotiate a postal-letter exchange, which I think shall be a good thing. That will take Marti the fuck out of it, and oh, how pissed off she was at my “cc” of our exchange to Kate! SMP stayed afterward to explain to Marti that Kate wasn’t the one in danger and that it was in no one’s interest to pretend that I was like my brother. I am, Sarah said, emphatically not, and my death would serve no one, Kate included. In many ways I think my death would be simpler and easier for Kate than my life: death she knows. It sure as shit would be easier for me, but blah blah blah.

No death today.

What a pompous twit.

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: “Rory Bowman” <rbowman@reed.edu>
Reply-To: bowman@pobox.com
To: Catherine Lynne Carter <ccarter@reed.edu>
Cc: Marti Dell <mdell@hevanet.com>
Subject: FYI 1: Marti to Rory Re Kate (fwd)

I don’t know what your state of mind is or what you have told Marti, but in the interest of transparency, following are the messages she and I exchanged recently. She has graciously agreed to meet with me for coffee this Sunday.  – Rory

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:35:12 -0700
From: Marti Dell <mdell@hevanet.com>
To: “R. Rory Bowman” <rbowman@reed.edu>
Subject: Kate

Hi Rory,

Marti here (yes, Kate forwarded your email addresss to me).  First of all, I wanted to thank you for thinking of me a couple weeks ago about the tickets. Sorry I wasn’t home.  I’m sure it must have been (at least somewhat) awkward for you to call me.  I want you to know that although I am a close friend of Kate’s, I certainly don’t harbor any ill feelings towards you.  I always make my own decisions about people. So far, I still think of you as a nice and decent person, even if you may have a few emotional problems regarding Kate.  We all have our relationship issues that we need to deal with, me included.

However, I am primarily writing because of Kate.  She called me Sunday night, very upset, because you had sent her an email stating that you plan on calling her sometime this week.  I hope you aren’t offended, but I recommended that she forward your email to me, and I volunteered to write you back.  My recommendation to you is…don’t call her.

I will quote your email message here:

> “Well, I’ve been waiting months for you to write, with no good result.
> I shall probably phone sometime this week, probably in the evening. If I’m
> a good boy, the first call shall come Tuesday evening (when I assume
> you’ll be at knitting), but I’d like to talk fairly soon.

> I’ve been good, to no apparent benefit.
> Time, I think, to learn why.”

I will be very honest and admit that I certainly do not know what the content of all of your conversations have been with Kate, and so I do not know if you feel she promised to talk to you at a certain point, and do not want to make any judgments there.  However, I also know that Kate is definately not ready to talk to you.  I strongly recommend that you do not call her this week, or contact her at all for many weeks to come.

I also don’t understand what your email means, and Kate seemed somewhat confused by it also.  How do you feel that you have “been good, to no apparent benefit”?  What apparant benefit did you expect to receive? What have you been waiting for Kate to write to you about?

I can certainly understand your frustration if you feel that there are issues you need closure on, and that you may not have gotten that closure.  I have certainly had that happen in my life, and recently too.  However, you also won’t get closure (or any answers at all) if you push too hard.

Rightly or wrongly, Kate is not comfortable talking to you at this time. She needs to be in a better emotional space before she will be able to talk to you comfortably.  This is not something you can push about, and the more you try to push it, the less comfortable she is going to be about talking to you.

If it would help at all, I would be glad to talk to you about anything I may know or understand, but again, I strongly recommend that you do not contact Kate.

Give her a break, Rory.  And if you think that you already have, then give her a bigger (and longer) break.  As I am sure you are aware, she is working full time and trying to finish up her language requirements. Working full time and going to school is very demanding, so just leave her alone…at least until after she has completed school next May.

I understand that it may be difficult, but supposedly you still care somewhat about her.  If you do, then give her this space.

If you don’t care about her, and are just trying to harass her, then definately back off.  Although currently I think you are a fine and nice person, I am very protective of my friends, especially Kate.  She is like a younger sister to me.  If I think you are just trying to deliberately harass her, to get back at her because of some imagined (or real) wrong you feel she did you, then you will no longer find me to be quite as pleasant as I am being currently.  Right now, I am trying to appeal to your good nature.  I hope it is that part of you that is trying to contact her, and which will now give her the additional space and time she needs.

Please feel free to contact me, either at work or home, if you feel that there is any way I can help.  But yet again, I ask that you do not call her, quit emailing her, and just basically leave her alone and forget she exists, until at least next May. My work number is 241-2885 and home is 788-9219.

Thank you for your time.  I hope you are doing well.

Marti

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: “R. Rory Bowman” <rbowman@reed.edu>
Reply-To: bowman@pobox.com
To: Marti Dell <mdell@hevanet.com>
Subject: Re: Kate

I would very much like to talk to you (or someone else with any insight as to where Kate is emotionally) if that would be okay. I’m a bit busy this week, but can adapt to your schedule. Please let me know what kind of times would be good for coffee or something. An hour or two in a public place would be ideal.

I have an Apple demonstration I am doing Sunday until 6 pm, then I wanted to go get a flu shot before 7. Would sometime shortly after 7 work for you Sunday evening?

Thanks for your help. Please give my love to Kate. – Rory