From:       Louise

Sent:       Friday, March 23, 2001 14:26

To:         donna laframboise

Subject:    response to chin up #2

[The evidence regarding e-mails from the reporter to Ms. Malenfant includes two by the latter (March 14 and May 7, linked elsewhere) embedding brief words from the reporter's e-mails; also reference to two more e-mails in the next one linked here. As for this e-mail, Mr. Bouvier had sent the comments below only to the reporter, so Ms. Malenfant could've gotten them only from her (apparently in an e-mail the same day labeled 'chin up #2' by the reporter)--as the reporter evidently admitted when questioned about this Malenfant email in discovery.]   [Next]                                                                                                                                                                                    



I wish to respond to the following comments made by Mr. Bouvier:


You may be interested to know that Ms. Malenfant was at the last ECMAS

> general meeting on March 12th and she did nothing to inform the voters

> with the Information that she says she has on  Adams and Ferrel

> Christensen.

> Please note that she said nothing and her entourage left promptly in the

> middle of the meeting after her candidate lost. If as she states in a

> recent e-mail that she was “spurred on’ to act because of her "duty as a

>family advocate", then why did she not speak out before the voting? There

> was ample opportunity for her to do so but she did not.




There was no ample opportunity for anyone to speak at this meeting, least of all, me. Though I had spoken to many people before the election about my concerns, many of whom were ecmas members who did not attend the election, I did not want to “make a scene”. I thought that, in a room of 30 people, there must have been others outside of my ten votes who would be troubled by the issues I had raised. The grapevine of the family rights community is small, and I felt that I had told enough people about the problems that everyone would hear some version of them, and could make an informed decision about the future of ecmas. I assume that is what happened that night. When the election was over, I saw the lack of professionalism of the vote, little slips of paper flying everywhere, on the ground, and I saw that there were 33 votes cast for president, 29 cast for vice president, and only 30 votes in the room during the pre-vote count. The remainder of the meeting was of no interest to me, or to the people who came to support me, so I quietly spread the word to my “entourage” and we left, two at a time. I did not feel beaten, just incredibly saddened, and certainly in no mood to make a big scene. By voting in  Adams as vice president, I knew that there was no will in this organization to do anything about the issues I had raised, and I phoned the national post two days later. Why would I want power in an organization I can’t respect? Parents Helping Parents and its good name is power enough for me, and I’m using it now to protect the public from these whackos.