Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: derdrittemann2003@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 2 Jun 2005 14:42:41 -0700
iladsfan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> "I really am sorry dritte. I jumped to conclusions and believed what was
> sent to me in emails and what I had read. I never would have thought
> that someone would make up something like this and be so insistent
> about it, and when I believed that, I believed a lot of other stuff
> that I guess wasnt true. I dont believe that youre chuck or mcsweegan,
> I dont believe any of teh garbage people said about you".
Thanks very, very much, "ilads"...that is very nice to hear. Very
gracious of you. I appreciate that very much.
And I apologize to you as well...I said some awful things to you during
this exchange...I will now go back and see if I can delete them. I was
just frustrated, is all. It's been a long time.
But, please...don't worry about it...I've had much worse thrown my way
in the past. Forget it.
I think it is understandable. You are sick and hurting...and you get
treated very badly by the very people that you turn to for help...the
healthcare professionals. So, first you feel hurt and letdown...and
then you get angry and resentful. I understand. But it takes awhile to
learn the "ins and outs" of all the looniness of Lyme politics. Yes,
I'm fairly sure someone helped point you in the wrong direction.
>
> "I now believe that kathleen is a very sick woman and deserves our
> sympathy and help if shell take it. It took me a while because I was so
> hurt and angry when I learned the truth but I thought about it and I
> think she probably believes what she says, and needs to get a lot of
> help. It is a shame. I really think she probably means well and would
> like to help but I think shes not in a place where she can help anyone
> but maybe we can help her"?
You have to want help first. Believe it or not...I tried to help her.
She and Lisa preferred to attack me and make up false accusations about
me.
I don't know what the problem is here...but I am troubled by her
behavior here in regard to the questions about the case number. That, I
am afraid, tends to indicate conscious deception on her part.
Worse, I am troubled by what the attorney told me about her materials
being returned to her. I would bet big money that a letter accompanied
that return. I just don't see how she could have been confused about
the status of the thing...think it was under investigation when the
materials she submitted were returned.
Perhaps she can now explain.
Personally, I think we are owed an explanation.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: derdrittemann2003
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: WoodTick
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: CaliforniaLyme
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- References:
- Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: derdrittemann2003
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: kathleen
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: CaliforniaLyme
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: derdrittemann2003
- Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- From: iladsfan
- Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- Prev by Date: Pachner 2005: LNB is NOT a chronic infection!!!!!!
- Next by Date: Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- Previous by thread: Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- Next by thread: Re: Conversation with the US Attorney--District of Connecticut
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|