Dear Cyndy,

Thank you for writing. I agree that Victoria's is a very 
eloquent letter. I have my doubts about "diagnoses" in general.
To my mind, the issue would not be nomenclature, but the
availability of any therapy to ameliorate the disorder when
it occurs and the availablility of prophylaxis to prevent its
recurrence.

As I may have written, we're planning to meet Klemens at the
airport in Charlotte NC on July 21, spend the night in Konnarock,
and return to Belmont on July 22. As for the Hearing, I have
no idea what Mr. Pucci might have up his sleeve, - what I suspect
is: nothing. He's told the Board that he's bringing Messrs Butler
and Ramos for an encore. Mr. Butler has acknowledged knowing
nothing about plumbing; Mr. Ramos seems awkward and unintelligent.Of course, my witnesses are no Nobel Prize winners either; they
might wilt under rigorous cross examination. But Mr. Pucci is
no trial lawyer, and more important, he knows nothing about
plumbing; wouldn't know what questions to ask. We'll find out.
It'll be interesting.

It's not the witnesses, it's not the lawyer. it's the polically
intrenched Plumbing Board itself which has so little mind as
to be incapable of recognizing its mindlessness, an 
administrative imbecile enibriated with its power. I consider
it quite possible that they will, as they have done before,
disregard the Appeals Court mandate, disregard the evidence
and rule against me. I think I would have the energy to appeal,
but the initial instance, the "Superior Court" is accustomed
to rubber-stamping the denial of administrative challenges.
A third appeal to the Appeals Court would most likely be
required. It's a toss-up whether they would feel their
authority more threatened by my challenge of the establishment
or by the Executive's flouting of Appeals Court orders.
Might as well fly to Las Vegas and spin the roulette wheel
to find out.

Good night. Stay as well and as happy as possible. Give
my best to Ned.

Jochen