I received a letter a few days ago. The author took great pains to remain anonymous–so much so, that I have no way to respond but to do so publicly, and to hope that I can do so without betraying a trust or an identity. That inherently means that details will be thin. I can say–indeed, I cannot address the matter without saying–that the letter makes serious allegations against someone who participates in our forums.
I must next say that I will not countenance a chorus of is it I, nor will I exclude anyone. Do not post comments asking who was so slandered (if indeed it is slander), and do not send me private messages or e-mails to that end. Any such questions will be ignored, and my ignoring them should not be taken either as affirmation nor as denial. The anonymity of both the accuser and the accused must be protected, and thus I implore you not to make any guesses.
It also must be noted that the coincidence of my receipt of this letter with the current active forum thread touching on abusive relationships is not other than coincidence. It was sent to me at the company address, which is currently overseen by someone else, postmarked in October. Because of my mother-in-law’s funeral I was not at the December meeting, and would not yet have received the few pieces directed to my attention had he not decided to drive out for a brief visit the other night. This person did not write because of the thread, but wrote long before the thread began.
I could, of course, not respond at all; but then the author might wonder whether I ever received the note (despite the delivery confirmation tag, which only says it was placed in our post office box), or whether I took it seriously. I do take the matter seriously, and believe that you ought to have taken the matter to the police at the time–although I understand why you did not, and certainly why you would not do so after so much time has elapsed. What I do not understand, though, is what you expect me to do.
It is evident that you expect your revelation to have impact on my conduct, on my relationship with someone who is, by most definitions, a fan, a supporter, a customer–someone who would like to be defined as a friend, and who perhaps deserves that designation but that I am extremely miserly in extending it. (Most of those I have called friends have hurt me very badly; I imagine, though, that only friends can do so, and most I still call friends, despite being distanced from them.) Yet there is much to suggest that I not allow it to do so.
There is, first and foremost, the problem of credibility–your credibility. Your letter sounds sincere, and has the marks of truth; I would not call you a liar. However, I cannot (for obvious reasons) ask the accused to defend or give the other side of the story. If you know anything about me, you undoubtedly know that I hold a Juris Doctore–a degree in law, trained to the bar, taught to weigh the evidence and afford all participants their rights. Your accused is denied the right to defense; indeed, you deny the right to announce the charges. You ask me to pass judgment without giving the defendant a fair hearing. I will not do this. I am therefore forced, by the terms you have dictated, to ignore your evidence as more prejudicial than probative, that is, its truthfulness and relevance cannot be tested, but its impact on the jury would be insurmountable. It must be excluded.
It is further noted that you state you could have taken the matter to the authorities and you did not. Again, I understand how someone in your position would not report such a crime; but the failure to report it undermines your credibility yet again. Many people could tell stories of their spouses assaulting them, but since the police were never called such events are not on the record, and amount to nothing more than stories which might have been invented for the purpose of smearing the character of the other party. It does not sound to me as if you are attempting to invent slanderous lies for the purpose of poisoning my opinion of someone I know, but then if it did sound like that it would not be effective. As much as I am inclined to believe you, you have eliminated any supporting evidence, and it is only the word of someone who refuses to be identified against someone who communicates with me on completely unrelated subjects and is unaware of the accusations raised. I hope you can see my predicament. If I doubt you, I am unfair to you; if I believe you, I am unfair to the accused.
Finally, you are aware that I am a Christian. It is not a secret. It means that I am obligated to extend love and forgiveness to others, even if it means risk and pain for myself. I empathize with your pain; but even were it my own, had I been the victim, I know that we win this battle by love and forgiveness, not by vindictiveness and accusation. Jesus showed the way, embracing the pain and abuse He did not deserve so that we would understand that loving and serving others sometimes means being mocked, beaten, and killed. It may seem shallow and uncaring to you that I do not choose to deliver vengeance upon someone who hurt you, but it is not my place to do so. It is my place to extend grace, kindness, concern, love, to you but also to the accused. I cannot show love to you by showing hatred to another. Nor can I besmirch another based on unverifiable claims in an anonymous letter.
If you wish to discuss the matter further, my e-mail addresses are scattered all over the web and simple enough to find; you can reach me at the one I use for Gaming Outpost, if you like: referee@mjyoung.net. You can use another.
Or you can send me another anonymous letter, fraught with the same problems that plague this one.
Thank you for taking the time to read my reply.
–M. J. Young
