X-Message-Number: 6158
From:  (hEpCaT)
Subject: Reply to Platt re Leary
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 09:14:08 -0700 (PDT)

> Message #6151
> Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 12:52:51 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Charles Platt <>
> Subject: The Invitable Cosenza
> David Cosenza writes:
> > Charles Platt (vice-president of CryoCare) announced in message #6143 
> > that Timothy Leary has uncerimoniously been refused cryopreservation 
> > services by Biopreservation.
> I announced nothing of the sort. As has now become apparent, Leary himself
> had moved toward a position of not wanting cryopreservation services. This
> was his final step after persistently and obstinately refusing many other
> forms of care (such as free 24-hour nursing). Circumstances at the house,
> which he could have corrected quite easily, made it virtually impossible
> to provide standby, even if he had wanted it, which he didn't. I tried to
> allude to this when I stated in my message that BioPreservation services
> are still reliably available to EVERYONE WHO WANTS THEM (in CryoCare). 
> I'm sorry you didn't pick up on this, David. I thought it was obvious 
> enough. 

But... *confused* Tim WAS a member of CryoCare and he WANTED your assistance,
so how do you justify that you offer services to people in your oeganization 
that want them? What about Tim-- and please don't tell us that he has opted
against freezing now because before that even happened you announced that 
BPI had resigned from the case with CryoCare's knowledge and support. This
is what triggered his resignation, and as for Leary's unexpected 
(to you anyway) renunciation of cryonics, it is plain to see that he has 
been alienated to the extent that he wants nothing more to do with you or 
anybody else that is going to treat him like garbage, and I can certainly 
understand that feeling!

> > He alluded to frustrations involved (odd 
> > since the withdrawal was "cordial"),
> Not odd at all. As you are now aware, Dr. Leary was cordially bidding us 
> farewell because he had no personal interest in our being there, even 
> while he continues to admire cryonicists generally.

Smoke screen. You are saying this because he backed out, but there is 
much that you are purposely withholding from us to protect yourself and 
CryoCare and I think it stinks! The version that I got from Tim's friends
was that Mike Darwin lectured them and generally had a problem getting 
along with them which is why *YOU* were begging Arel to create a bridge 
between the fun loving compassionate people in that house and the tight 
assed martinettes at BPI and CryoCare!

> > as well as legal and logistical 
> > risks that CryoCare and BPI are apparently ill-equipped to handle at this 
> > stage in their development
> Well, Dave, you have previously characterized BioPreservation as a 
> company that plays fast and loose and takes all kinds of risks. Now you 
> characterize it as being reluctant to take risks. I get the impression 
> from this that you are not making serious comments, but merely slinging 
> any kind of mud that comes to hand. Am I right?

I stand by what I've said.

> > only that CryoCare is still responsible for Leary, but also that Leary 
> > somehow appreciated being left out in the cold like this and characterized 
> > the culprits as being "heroes".
> A pity you rushed your statement into email before understanding any part 
> of the situation. I hope it is now clear. Leary continues to admire 
> Mike's work and does indeed regard him as a "hero" (with characteristic 
> Learyesque overstatement), even while he no longer has a personal 
> interest in being frozen. 

This just isn't believable.

> > I know that if my service provider ever 

> > dumped me I would raise caine, but then I am not signed up with the CryoCare
> > family of companies. I'd be wondering just how reliable cryonicists are.
> At no time was Timothy Leary "dumped." Do you really want to get sued 
> again, David? It wastes everyone's time.

What do you call withdrawing from the residence and helping Mike take his 
equipment out whilst Tim lies on his death bed deteriorating? Why didn't 
you (in anger) stop Mike and demand that he finish the job in the name of 
cryonics and our common mission instead of just going along? Don't you have
any concern for the welfare of others? (Btw, speaking of the lawsuit 
lodged against me by a CryoCare member that Platt refers to-- it was 
dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to respond to discovery 

> > Also, if Platt has no right to publicize Leary's personal 
> > life, then I don't see how he could follow that up with "In due course we 
> > [CryoCare] will offer a detailed discussion of all the various events 
> > and issues involved."  Hmmm.
> I was trying to indicate that after Timothy Leary's legal death, I will
> feel freer to talk about some aspects of this case. This is customary in
> your organization too, David. 

All I can infer from what you have said here is that once Leary is dead, it'll
be kind of hard for him to sue you if you do publish a load of crap. And once 
you've dumped a member OR a member has dumped you, you don't still have 
consent for public disclosure because your contract is void.

> > At this point, I cannot see how CryoCare can assure its members that BPI 
> > will be there for them to provide them with a "high quality suspension"

> > in light of what has happened (and why), and I think that they owe everbody
> > an explanation. In my opinion, the ONLY options for cryonic suspension are 
> > the operations that have long track records for for following through when 
> > the going gets rough and courageously standing by thier patients. 
> BioPreservation expended more time and money attempting to provide care
> for Timothy Leary than any organization has ever expended, pre-mortem, on
> any patient, so far as I am aware. Since BioPreservation is the only
> cryonics service provider with an MD on its staff, it is uniquely equipped
> in this respect. Since Dr. Leary has now decided not to opt for cryonics
> with ANY service provider, the expenses incurred by BioPreservation with
> its pre-mortem care are very unlikely to be reimbursed. I would say this
> indicates considerable dedication, wouldn't you? 

Dedication is fine unless it leads you to believe that you are entitled to 
run the life of the person you are helping.

> I realize you have a never-ending supply of bile, David, so I fully expect
> more to come, but for the time being I believe I have satisfied your
> rather predictable objections. 
> --CP

You answered with another irresponsible and evasive reply, but we're all still
waiting for an HONEST explanation. Please.

Ever forward,


David Cosenza                                           
1264-bit Key fingerprint = BF 6C AA 44 C6 CA 13 3F  4A EC 0A 90 AE F3 74 6D
4096-bit Key fingerprint = A4 79 15 79 D2 73 7D 3F  34 88 2E ED 93 6F 46 B1
     "When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption."
  		     Public Keys available upon request

	 In the land of the dark, the Ship of the Sun is driven by 
		the Greatful Dead. --Egyption Book of the Dead

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6158