X-Message-Number: 22564
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:06:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: John Grigg

I regret that my friend John Grigg is now following in the
footsteps of Sports Illustrated, The Associated Press, and
The Arizona Republic by focusing public attention on a
private memo which I wrote primarily for Alcor's directors.

The difference is that John claims to be personally concerned
about JL (I am referring to him by his initials to prevent
this message from popping up in the future, if someone types
the name of Alcor's CEO into a search engine). Since JL will
not be working fulltime at Alcor after the end of this year
and presumably will be looking for a job elsewhere, I suspect
he might prefer the "memo issue" to disappear instead of
being dug up all over again.

Did you consider this possibility, John?

I think it is especially bizarre that you would want me to
publish the entire thing. I suggest you ask JL how he feels
about this. In fact, since he has his own copy, why not ask
*him* to publish it if you think this would be a good idea.

Personally I feel that the text is no longer relevant since
JL has announced his resignation. This, surely, is the end of
the story--or it should be.



Now I have a few things to say about my own position. I am
quite willing to admit faults and flaws, but I am not at all
willing to admit or ignore accusations that are unflattering,
inaccurate, and pejorative.

First by implication you impugn my motives. John, why do you
imagine I would spend two weeks writing something, completely
unpaid, for the directors of an organization to which I have
devoted a huge amount of time and love? Do you really imagine
it was an exercise in petty malice? Wouldn't it make sense
that I must have a great personal investment in Alcor, and
therefore my primary objective at all times is to protect it
and its patients, regardless of any personal feelings that I
may have about other people, positive or negative?

I put about 9 months of my life into Alcor. Others have put
in much more, but I am at an age where time is precious and I
cannot expect to possess youthful vitality indefinitely.
This was a very big commitment for me, especially since I
took responsibility for case work, for which I was not
ideally qualified. The stress level was such that I had to
use anti-anxiety medication on a regular basis, and I had
recurring nightmares. I completed the six months that I had
promised, and during the course of that time I more than
tripled the number of people available to do standbys. If
this hadn't happened, Alcor would have been unable to do
standbys lasting more than 4 or 5 days, depending on the
availability of volunteers. I also made a lot of other
changes in other areas, and I ran five cases, none of which
contained significant errors. Maybe I was just lucky, but
either way I think this is a very unusual record. I'm proud
of what I achieved, and I am protective of it.

From my actions (which should speak louder than words, if
there is any fairness at all) you should see why I get really
pissed when someone such as yourself suggests that I may have
cheap personal motives.

It is pejorative and inappropriate to describe me as pursuing
a "vendetta." JL has been unfailingly polite and decent to
me, and gave me a lot of support during my first six months
at Alcor. I have no personal grudge against him and have made
this clear numerous times.

You ask if JL was asked to leave or if he quit of his own
volition. Again, you don't seem to consider the feelings of
the person whom you claim to be defending. He may not
appreciate the suspicion and doubt that your question could
create. Also, I am not a director and was not present at the
meeting where JL submitted his resignation. So why ask me? If
you really want to know the answer, you can ask JL himself. I
encourage you to do this privately.

You suggest it was tactless of me to send him a copy of what
I wrote. This again shows that you have not taken the time to
think about the issue from his point of view. Maybe it will
be clearer if I restate it from *your* point of view. Suppose
I wrote something about you, John. If I am a fair and decent
person, don't you think I should give you an immediate
opportunity to correct any errors which I might have made?
Also, shouldn't I share the text with you, so that you don't
have to wonder what people are saying behind your back? This
is a matter of professional decency and courtesy. It is also
a matter of being honest.

Regarding your own evaluation of Alcor staff and management,
I must point out that you have only visited the facility a
couple of times, and you lack sufficient information to be an
objective observer. Your perceptions do not match the reality
that I experienced.

As for my reasons for quitting membership, I prefer not to go
into the specific details one by one, but I have made it very
clear that for me, membership is less important than the
satisfaction I derive from activism. Why can't you accept
this? Also, when I quit from Alcor in 1992, I don't recall
any questions being asked, or any fuss. Therefore I did not
expect things to be substantially different this time. To
suggest that I was trying to make a big statement is grossly
misleading. My CryoNet post was calm, factual, and brief.

Finally you question my judgment in trusting Larry Johnson.
I have already pointed out that he saved two of our cases
from a far worse outcome than would have been achieved
otherwise. He was a good paramedic and he did what he said he
would do for us--up to a point where I believe he privately
changed his outlook. I am not excusing his subsequent acts in
any way. I was horrified to find that my own informal words
had been taped by Larry without my knowledge or consent. But
if you think you could have predicted what was going to
happen when Larry was hired, I simply don't believe it.
Everyone trusted him absolutely, and no one had a critical
word to say about him. Is your judgment really so much better
than theirs?

In addition you seem to think that I had the authority to
hire Larry Johnson all on my own. JL and Michael Riskin spent
time with Larry when he first visited Alcor for his
interview, and their agreement was necessary before the
decision to hire Larry was submitted to the board for their
approval. I willingly admit that I selected Larry Johnson's
resume, but I repeat: I did not have authority to hire him.

Regarding my decision to share my JL memo with Johnson, there
were excellent reasons for doing so. Larry at that time was
the #1 person responsible for clinical services. He needed to
be fully informed in order to do his job. Moreover, for
reasons which do not concern us here, he had threatened to
quit just four weeks previously, and I felt he might leave if
I didn't level with him. Of course in reality he was going to
leave anyway, but at the time, I desperately wanted him to
maintain our field capability.



Now for the bottom line. I have been reluctant to get into
this, because I hoped it was self-evident. But since my
integrity has been questioned, I will respond.

The memo I wrote was not centrally important to the
seven-page story that appeared in Sports Illustrated. Think
about it, John. There were seven pages, in which maybe five
or six sentences referred to me. Obviously the feature could
have been published without me and without the memo.

In reality the memo was just the icing on the cake. The cake
itself--the real substance of the story, which made it worth
publishing--was supplied entirely through the actions,
inactions, errors, and omissions of other people.

They have chosen to remain silent, and I must emphasize that
I respect their right to do so. What I do not respect is
someone leaping to the facile, thoughtless conclusion that I
am the bad guy just because I am the only one who has
admitted an error.

If you are really concerned about the Sports Illustrated
story and everything that followed from it, by all means
include me as someone who unwittingly facilitated it, but do
not blame me as being the primary enabler.

Better still, for the sake of Alcor, JL, and the rest of us
who are quite sick of this whole topic, I suggest you should
stop blaming people altogether.

--Charles Platt

Footnote: I am assuming that a message with the name "John
Grigg" in the header did in fact originate entirely from John
Grigg. A friend of mine who is perhaps less trusting than I
am has suggested that since the message is uncharacteristic
of John and contains none of his usual stylistic mannerisms
(lol), an unnamed collaborator may have been involved.

John, I know that you are a truthful person. Can you assure
us that you wrote every word of your message without any
encouragement or collaboration from anyone else? If in fact
another person collaborated in some way, may we know who it
was?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22564