Dear Marion,

At this juncture the future is too uncertain that I could
predict whether, when you pass through Boston on your return
from France on August 7, we will be in Belmont or in Konnarock.
Margaret and I would very much like to see you this summer.
We will be considering and reconsidering our plans.

Thank you for your comments about my arguments in the lawsuit.
I agree with you that it's desirable to market oneself and 
ones position to the court. Forty-two years ago, when I sued
the Eye and Ear Infirmary, I read all of Judge Garrity's 
published opinions and formulated my claims using his own words
which he found irresistable. The present situation is somewhat
different. I doubt many of Judge Macdonald's opinions have been
published, but I must admit that I haven't looked. We mustn't
forget that his initial ruling against me was partially
overturned by the Appeals Court, perhaps for him a matter of
some chagrin. Only 16.6 percent of appeals by practicing
attorneys are sustained; presumably the fraction of pro-se
reversals is even smaller. Moreover, Judge Macdonald's
rulings have been persistently unfair. On April 28, 2011,
he gave to the Nantucketers 37 days (June 10, 2011) to file
their Inspection Report, but to me he gave only 4 days (June 16,
2011) to prepare a reply. When I challenged him to a redefinition
of "integrity" in the context of permitting Plumbing Judge
Ciarmataro to adjudicate a case where Ciamartaro had tampered
with the principal witnesses, Judge Macdonald virtually scuttled 
the case by cancelling the June 16th 2011 hearing. Since he made 
no provision for further hearings, he in effect consigned the 
litigation to limbo. The case was inadvertently resuscitated by 
myself, when, because of an Internet black-out, I telephoned the 
Clerk's Office to assure myself that no funny business was being 
concocted. It was the clerks, not the judge, who determined that 
a hearing needed to be scheduled.  Remanding the case to the
Plumbing Board at this juncture, as if a finding by the
Plumbing Board could rehabilitate Mr. Ciarmatoro's calumny,
is another exhibition of Judge Macdonald's prejudice, as is
his postponement of the next "status review conference" for
another 4 months. It's unrealistic to expect him ever to
rule in my favor. However the more vivid and incisive my
criticism of Nantucket's fabrication of evidence and obstruction
of justice, the more vulnerable to appeal will be his judgment
against me. The Appeals Court can't afford to leave such
manifest impropriety of the judicial process uncorrected. 
Or so I calculate.  I may be wrong. Please correct me.

For reasons not entirely clear to me, progress on the novel has
been slow. I'm working on Chapter 53. Perhaps my failure to
concentrate is a transient weakness; it may also be the
beginning of progressive senile incapacity. Time will tell. 

I hope that you are - and continue to be well, and that from
time to time I'll find in my e-mail inbox, a letter from you.
Jochen