RESPONSES TO UNDERTAKINGS
7 It was belatedly noticed that the wording behind Undertaking 7 (from the 2003 session) is broad enough to encompass printed agendas for general ECMAS meetings. These were kept much more regularly than were minutes. Because of the degree of interest the Respondent expressed in the early history of ECMAS, all of the ones available up to publication of the Post articles are attached here.
12 ADVISE OF ANY
15(B) IN THE STATEMENT OF DEFENSE IS INCOMPLETE AND POTENTIALLY MISLEADING.
Dr. Christensen sees no other specific reasons for this belief than those discussed in oral examination.
13 PROVIDE COPIES OF EMAILS THAT WOULD OUTLINE THE BOUNDARIES OF MS. MALENFANT'S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND HER EXPECTED ROLE THAT MIGHT RELATE BACK TO THE SCOPE OF DR. CHRISTENSEN'S INVITATION TO HER.
The attached emails
from before Ms. Malenfant came to
14 PROVIDE TO PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL THE NAMES OF CLIENTS THAT [Tim] ADAMS OBTAINED BECAUSE OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT WITH ECMAS. ADVISE WHETHER THERE IS AN ISSUE OF CONFIDENTIALITY; IF SO, PROVIDE THE PLAINTIFF'S POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THAT ISSUE.
The Plaintiff's position is that there is very much an issue of confidentiality here, one undergirded by issues of relevance. For it is one thing to turn over information of dubious relevance when there is no harm to anyone; it is quite another thing when so doing means breaking solemn promises made by associates who have put their trust in you. Those contacting ECMAS for help have always been given promises of strict confidentiality by Dr. Christensen's colleagues in that group; such a promise is an essential part of the introduction at the weekly support-group meeting. It is made in recognition that many present are (as the Post article itself noted) already shell-shocked by their experiences, fearful and suspicious. We regard this pledge as being of great moral significance, and as on a par with those made by various others dealing with difficult human problems including newspaper reporters.
And the violation of such confidence, and of personal privacy, is surely unjustified when the grounds for requesting information are tenuous to nonexistent. The undertaking asks for names of all clients known to have hired Mr. Adams as a result of anything done through ECMAS--not merely of such persons hired by him because directed to him by Dr. Christensen. But ECMAS and other individuals working in various ways with ECMAS are not parties to this suit, and their behavior--since the fact that they have directed clients to Mr. Adams is relevant but uncontested--is not at issue in the suit.
As regards Mr. Adams, he advises us that he keeps no records of how his clients first came to him; and now, 4+ years after the material events, is unable to recall such information. Further to that, he certainly feels professionally obligated to keep the promises of confidentiality he has always made.
As for Dr. Christensen himself, he did not keep records of persons he referred to Mr. Adams, much less of the relative few who might have hired him as opposed to just getting information from him. Dr. Christensen is likewise unable to recall any of the individuals whom he directed in that fashion, except for the two sisters already acknowledged. Consequently, his only source of such information now is the brief notes (redacted versions attached for Undertakings 16 and 20) he took in meetings of the ECMAS support group. In them are recorded names of some persons present who were advised to or expressed a desire to get help--paid or unpaid--from Mr. Adams outside the meeting. But there is no indication Dr. Christensen himself suggested that any of those individuals do so. (Most had that intent, or were already working with Mr. Adams, before coming to ECMAS.) On the grounds stated above, then, Dr. Christensen declines to reveal these names.
15 PROVIDE THE NAME OF THE FEMALE LAWYER THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN RECOMMENDED TO VISITORS TO ECMAS. (ALREADY ANSWERED AT PAGE 148)
16 (UNDER ADVISEMENT) PRODUCE ALL OF THE NOTES THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN HAS FOR SUPPORT GROUP MEETINGS.
These notes cover a period of time from January 2000 through the present, but we hold that only the notes before and surrounding the time of events involved in this lawsuit have potential relevance to it. As redacted photocopies for the first six months of 2001 are already in our production at Tab 96 (see our response to Undertaking 20 regarding its transcription), redacted photocopies and transcriptions of the notes for the year 2000 have been attached here.
17 PRODUCE ANY EMAILS OR OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN HAS THAT DOCUMENT THE FALLING OUT OR THE DETERIORATION IN HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH LOUISE MALENFANT.
The attached emails are the surviving records fitting this description. Very many others, because they do not reflect the conflict as this undertaking requires, are not attached. (Be warned that Ms. Malenfant's ways of embedding successive emails, including twice starting an interlineal response with her own name, make them difficult to follow.) Also attached is an essay, "My Conflict with Louise Malenfant", and copies of two newspaper columns relevant to one of the attached emails.
18 PROVIDE COPY OF THE JANUARY 26TH, 2001LETTER FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE.
19 IF DR. CHRISTENSEN IS UNABLE TO LOCATE HIS COPY OF THE JANUARY 26TH, 2001, LETTER FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MAKE A REQUEST FOR A COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE THROUGH COUNSEL.
See above. This letter had been filed elsewhere than the later-dated ones already submitted.
20 PROVIDE A TYPEWRITTEN COPY OF DR. CHRISTENSEN'S HANDWRITTEN MINUTE OR NOTES TAKEN FROM SUPPORT GROUP MEETINGS. (DOCUMENT 96 IN THE PLAINTIFF'S PRODUCTION)
Attached is a typescript version of Document 96. Due to the difficulty of reproducing the many abbreviations and scribbled infelicities in the original using the voice-recognition software Dr. Christensen had to acquire for this task, the text is not always transferred exactly. But he believes the result is everywhere accurate in intent, and far easier to understand just because of that constraint.
21 FURTHER TO UNDERTAKING NUMBER 4, WHICH WAS TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT, ADVISE IF THERE ARE OTHER EMAILS NOT PRODUCED REGARDING DR. CHRISTENSEN'S CORRESPONDENCE BOTH TO AND FROM DR. DIAMOND WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES RAISED IN THIS LAWSUIT.
A thorough search turned up one more letter (09/29/2001), attached. Also attached for completeness are four from Dr. Diamond originally provided only as embeds in Dr. Christensen's emails.
22 IDENTIFY IN THE ARTICLE TITLED "MORAL FERVOR WITHOUT ACCURATE KNOWLEDGE DOES EVIL" THOSE PASSAGES WHICH DR. CHRISTENSEN SUGGESTS IDENTIFY THAT HE HAS CONDEMNED ADULT/CHILD SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS IN THIS ARTICLE.
See attached, highlighted copy of said document. As noted in oral discovery, the topic of that essay's brief discussion of adult-child sex is the harmfulness of various things--the essay having been written in response to Ms. Laframboise's attitudes, as implied in her email to Dr. Christensen, regarding what is and is not harmful in connection with that subject. The relevance of harmfulness to moral issues has been discussed elsewhere in this discovery, notably in response to Undertaking 35. Beyond these matters, a major point of the essay was to condemn certain things that harm children: namely, irrational beliefs that exacerbate the effects of child sex abuse or else do harm in their own right.
23 IDENTIFY THE META-ANALYSIS OF STUDIES OF CHILD SEX ABUSE REFERRED TO IN THE ARTICLE TITLED "MORAL FERVOR WITHOUT ACCURATE KNOWLEDGE DOES EVIL."
"A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples" by Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch and Robert Bauserman: Psychological Bulletin 124:1, 1998.
24 PROVIDE THE REMAINDER OF ANY CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN DR. CHRISTENSEN AND STEPHANE C. GIROUX THAT HE MIGHT HAVE STILL IN HIS POSSESSION, POWER, OR CONTROL, RELEVANT TO THE ISSUES IN THIS LAWSUIT.
25 PRODUCE ANY FURTHER DOCUMENTS THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN MIGHT HAVE WITH RESPECT TO CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN HIMSELF AND CATHY YOUNG THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THE LAWSUIT.
Dr. Christensen feels certain there was no such correspondence beyond that already produced.
26 IDENTIFY THE DATE THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN SENT MIKE LABERGE A COPY OF THE ESSAY REFERRED TO IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S EMAIL TO MARINA FORBISTER OF APRIL 28TH, 2001.
Subsequent examination of records has confirmed that mention of sending the essay must have been in reference to the large emailing of March 26, 2001, which included Mr. LaBerge.
27 ADVISE IF THERE ARE ANY PORTIONS OF DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK WHERE HE CONDEMNS INTERGENERATIONAL SEX.
In all of the places where the book mentions (always very briefly) this subject, condemnation is
explicit or implicit. Following is a list of those occasions of mention:
P. 55 (false accusations of child molestation labeled "sickening")
P. 106 (pedophilia labeled "deviant" and "unhealthy")
Pp. 112-13 (these arguments for child pornography being illegal reflect such condemnation)
P. 129, 131 (pedophiles labeled "sexually disturbed", their desires "deviant")
Pp. 133-4 (adult-child sex associated with rape of women in argument promoting "children's safety")
Pp. 151-2 (speculation on how one type of emotional pain might cause the "problem" of pedophilia)
P. 173 (this passage discusses only harm from irrational fears, but uses the judgmental term 'abuse')
28 ADVISE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE ANY PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK THAT ALLUDE TO INTERGENERATIONAL SEX, OTHER THAN THE REFERENCE AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 112.
See response to Question 27 for all such references located pursuant to this undertaking.
29 FURTHER TO DR. CHRISTENSEN'S ASSERTION THAT THE TOPIC OF ADULT/CHILD SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE NOT IDENTIFIED IN HIS BOOK, ADVISE OF ANY CHANGE IN THAT ASSERTION AND IDENTIFY EITHER PASSAGES IN THE TEXT OF HIS BOOK OR OTHER WORKS REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT OR FOOTNOTES OR BIBLIOGRAPHY WHERE INTERGENERATIONAL SEX WAS A TOPIC OF THOSE PASSAGES OR STUDIES.
The sentence about "Dr. Christensen's assertion" is a misstatement; it neglects the passage on p. 112. In retrospect, Dr. Christensen's own statement that there is only one such passing allusion was also clearly in error: besides the rest on p. 112, there are the passages here listed for Undertaking 27.
Dr. Christensen also mistakenly said that he didn't think any works discussing adult-child sexual contact--assuming that works of the type then being queried, about non-western cultures, were what was meant--were cited in the book. This was corrected in subsequent oral discovery; but the article found was not cited for its content on that subject. Dr. Christensen's subsequent search of his book turned up no other sources cited for discussion of adult-child sexual contact in such cultures, nor has he recalled mention of such contact in non-western cultures in any sources he can now identify.
As for passages in the book mentioning adult-child sex at all, this is dealt with by Undertaking 28. And as for non-ethnographic sources dealing with adult-child sexual contact, those cited regarding that subject in the book's text or footnotes (see pages for Undertaking 27) are the four works by Abel, Ben-Veniste, Kutchinsky, and Goldstein & Kant. Finally, as their titles reflect, various other works that appear in the book's bibliography evidently discuss this subject in criminal and clinical settings: those by Badgley, Carter et al., Condron & Nutter, Cook & Fosen, Davis & Braucht, Gebhard et al., Goldstein et al., Johnson et al., William Marshall and Propper. The latter works, however, are cited in text or footnotes only concerning matters other or much broader than adult-child sexual contact.
30 ADVISE OF OTHER PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S TEXT WHICH HELP TO DEFINE THE TERM "EARLY SEXUAL EXPERIENCE" AS USED IN THE SENTENCE QUOTED WITHIN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 110 OF THE TEXT.
This undertaking and the following two are evidently about whether the phrases quoted somehow encompass adult-child sexual contact, even though, clearly, the passages discuss only children.
To start with the phrase 'sexual experience': together with 'sexual/erotic feelings' and 'sexual desire' it is used repeatedly in the book. But they are nowhere defined, the simple reason being that no other words can define them. They relate to certain sensations in the sex organs, and knowing the meaning ultimately requires experiencing the sensations. All a writer can do is assume that the great majority of readers will understand those familiar English words. As for the phrase 'early sexual experience', it refers, as the p. 110 context makes clear, to such experience when had by children or adolescents.
But besides the meaning or definition of a term, there is the category of things to which it can be applied. ('Basketball' is not part of the definition of 'sphere', but basketballs are among the things that are classified as spheres.) So there is the further question of which particular sources or types of sexual experience--if any--a writer is applying the phrase 'sexual experience' to in a given context. In this particular context, the two preceding paragraphs (the first two paragraphs of the section labeled 'Sex and young people') present as the issue for discussion the common belief that it is a bad thing for children or adolescents to behave sexually in any way, or even to have sexual feelings. So this passage is not about all possible sources or kinds of sexual experience; it is about sexual experience in itself. It is opposing the belief that it is immoral or harmful for young persons to have any sexual experience whatever. The passage is not somehow promoting the idea that every type of sexual experience (e.g., sadomasochism, fetishism, rape or sexual contact with adults) is acceptable for children to engage in.
More specifically, this section of the book opposes the idea that sexual experience per se is harmful to children or adolescents, that it is unnatural or unhealthy. Then plainly, again, it is not endorsing unnatural, unhealthy types of sexual experience; to the contrary, it is clearly rejecting any such kinds of sexual experience for them. Further to this, whenever the book mentions a specific type of sexual activity in children or adolescents in a condoning way, it is in regard to sexual desires or behavior of an individual alone (fantasy or masturbation), or to sexual contact with peers. (For examples, see pp. 15, 16, 23-24, 73, and 173 n. 14). Indeed, genuinely harmful types of sexual contact even between age-peers are nowhere condoned. And when the book does mean to mention, not sexual activity between children but sexual activity between adults and children, it does so explicitly--as it does subsequently on page 112. That place explicitly describes young people's sexual desires as directed toward peers.
31 ADVISE IF THERE'S ANY PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK THAT MIGHT DEFINE THE TERM "SEXUAL ACTIVITY" AS IT IS USED IN THE PASSAGE QUOTED ON PAGE 111 OF THE TEXT.
Again, one does not verbally define 'sexual' or 'activity' but assumes the reader already knows the terms. Yes, there are various kinds of activity to which the phrase might be applied, but again, in this context is discussed simply sexual activity per se. And again, the passage is not defending all types of sexual activity whatever for the young; it is a further part of the section's arguments against the view that young people should not have sexual experience of any sort. As further evidence that adult-child sex was no part of what Dr. Christensen had in mind when writing this phrase, note that the ensuing paragraph on p. 111 explicitly rules out "deviant sex" as being appropriate for children/adolescents.
32 ADVISE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY OTHER PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S TEXT WHICH HELP DEFINE THE TERM "SEX PLAY" AS USED IN THE SENTENCE QUOTED FROM THE SECOND PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 111 OF THE TEXT.
Plainly, the phrase 'such sex play' is referring to the preceding sentence, which reads 'Among other primates, early sexual activity, like play in general, is a kind of 'rehearsal' for their adult roles.' The phrase 'sex play' occurs nowhere else in the book. Nor does the ethologist's concept of rehearsal play, including sexual rehearsal play, appear elsewhere; this passage's explanation was felt to be sufficient. But as it refers the reader to a specific book, a copy of the relevant section of that book is attached. It reveals clearly that age-peer sex play is what Dr. Christensen had in mind in this discussion.
33 ADVISE AS TO ANY PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S TEXT WHERE HE FURTHER DEFINES OR DISCUSSES THE WORDS OR PHRASE "EROTICALLY EXPLICIT MATERIALS" AS USED IN THE SENTENCE QUOTED IN THE THIRD PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 111 OF THE TEXT.
Here again, there are no clearer words in which to define these words, and the many uses of such terms elsewhere in the book can throw no light on their use here. But it is stated in this paragraph itself that "depictions of deviant sex" would not be appropriate for children. And as illustrated by passages cited for Undertaking 27, the book labels pedophilic behavior deviant.
34 ADVISE OF OTHER PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK WHERE HE REFERS TO "DEVIANT SEX," WHICH WILL HELP TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE MEANT WHEN HE REFERRED TO "DEVIANT SEX" IN THE PASSAGE QUOTED FROM THE THIRD PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 111 OF THE TEXT.
The words 'deviant' and 'deviance' as applied to sex are synonyms of 'perverse' and 'perversion', as commonly employed and as consistently used in the book; they refer to being distorted from what is natural and healthy. The passages best revealing this negative meaning, discussing possible traumatic causes for such deviation from the natural and healthy, are to be found on p. 84, pp. 105-107 and pp. 151-152. All other appearances of the terms 'deviant' and 'deviance' in the book, although brief, are also negative: on pages 70, 80, 131, 171 and 174. But the paragraph queried in this undertaking has no need for such explanation. In describing "deviant" depictions of sex as inappropriate for young people, it is plainly indicating that deviant sex is something bad; and it pointedly differentiates such depictions from "healthy, happy" depictions, deviant sex itself from "healthy human behavior".
35 IDENTIFY PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK THAT SHOW THAT MORALITY IS RELEVANT TO ISSUES INVOLVING CHILDREN'S SEXUALITY.
As was pointed out in oral discovery, the entire book is about morality as applied to sexuality, which logically would include children's sexuality. As was also mentioned at that time, Chapter 2 is devoted to discussion of moral principles, and is explicitly presented as background for the rest of the book. Notably, it discusses the role of likely resulting harm in deciding whether some act is morally bad; that principle is then reinforced all through the book. This being so, discussing harm is precisely how any specific part of the book does address morality. In particular, the book-section titled "Sex and young people" is there to address the morality of child sexuality by discussing various sex-involving real and alleged causes of harm to them. As for sex-involving harm caused by young people, salient passages are listed in reply to Undertaking 36. More generally, on p. 153 the book asserts that young people must be taught morality, and that any guilt that is to be taught them should be over genuine evils such as aggression, not over the falsely alleged evils of sexual desire and sexual behavior per se.
36 IDENTIFY PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK THAT DEAL WITH THE TOPIC OR ALLUDE TO THE TOPIC OF TEACHING SEXUAL RESTRAINT.
In discussing (at some length on pp. 100-101 and 108-109) the special dangers to young people in the modern world from such harms as unwed pregnancy and sexual disease, the book implicitly endorses such levels of restraint as would reasonably keep the dangers low. In discussing the same dangers (in contrast to falsely alleged dangers) on pp. 110-111, the book explicitly says minors need guidance and discipline. Specifically as regards self-restraint, the book alludes in that same place to the importance of being able to delay gratification; and on pp. 88-89, in denying that sexual activity per se is harmful to young people's ability to behave responsibly, it is tacitly affirming the value of self-discipline.
37 IDENTIFY THE STUDIES THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN RELIED ON IN SUPPORT OF THE SENTENCE QUOTED FROM THE SECOND PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 89 OF THE TEXT, STUDIES THAT ARE NOT IDENTIFIED IN THE BOOK.
Dr. Christensen's mention of other sources (lines 10-16, p. 331) meant others besides those of Ch. 8's footnote 9 (which is about children, though some of its sources also discuss adolescents); those others include the ones cited in p. 89's footnote 2, overlooked during this discussion. Another source listed in the book's bibliography is that by Turnbull; promiscuity among the Mbuti youth he writes about is mentioned on p. 73. (Note that the term 'promiscuous' is defined and illustrated in footnotes 1, 5 and 6 of Ch. 2.) At this late date, Dr. Christensen is unable to recall any studies not identified in the book.
38 ADVISE WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE PASSAGES IN DR. CHRISTENSEN'S BOOK WHICH RELY ON OR USE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ARTICLE "CROSS-GENERATIONAL SEX IN TRADITIONAL HAWAI'I."
Subsequent searching has confirmed that the sole such passage is the footnote, already discussed in oral discovery, on p. 168 of the book. Further, examination of its earlier-published version (at Tab 84) reveals that Dr. Christensen first saw these articles after the book was already essentially written.
39 ADVISE WHAT PASSAGES OR PORTIONS OF DR. CHRISTENSEN'S TEXT MAY HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTENT OF THE ARTICLE TITLED "SOCIOPOLITICAL BIASES IN THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE ON ADULT HUMAN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR WITH CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS" IN JAY R. FEIERMAN'S PEDOPHILIA, BIOSOCIAL DIMENSIONS.
Subsequent searching has confirmed that the sole such passage or portion is the footnote on p. 171-2 of the book. Note well that the point of that footnote is to cite a critique of a certain author's general research methods--no other such published critique being known to Dr. Christensen when he wrote--not to employ in any way this article's discussion of adult sexual contact with children.
40 ADVISE AS TO THE CORRECT IDENTIFICATION OF THE ARTICLE WRITTEN BY DONNA LAFRAMBOISE ABOUT SENATOR ANNE COOLS THAT MIGHT HELP THE DEFENDANTS TO PRODUCE OR OBTAIN THE ARTICLE.
"Hurricane Anne (Senator Anne Cools)", Chatelaine, August 1997, p. 32.
41 ADVISE WHETHER THE MARCH 24, 2001, EMAIL WAS SENT TO PERSONS IN ADDITION TO DONNA LAFRAMBOISE AND THOSE PEOPLE IDENTIFIED IN THE CC LINES.
A copy of this email was subsequently sent as part of a compilation to a list of email addresses that had been employed by Louise Malenfant, that list being already identified in our production at Tab 25. A copy was later sent to seven other persons, also there identified.
42 IDENTIFY ALL OTHER PARTIES THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN SENT THE EMAIL DATED APRIL 3RD, 2001. (TAB 37 OF THE PLAINTIFF'S PRODUCTION)
Other copies of the press release in this email, as also revealed by our production, were later sent to Marina Forbister, Deborah Tetley of the Calgary Herald and Licia Corbella of the Calgary Sun. Dr. Christensen has been able to discover no other recipients except counsel or counsel's secretary.
43 ADVISE AS TO A RECORD OR RECORDS WHICH WOULD SHOW THE PARTICULAR VOTE MADE BY THE US CONGRESS WHICH CONDEMNED THE META-ANALYSIS REFERRED TO IN THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF PAGE E-3, WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO STATEMENT OF DEFENSE AND DEFENSE TO COUNTERCLAIM.
See attached article, "The congressional censure of a research paper: Return of the inquisition?" Dr. Christensen learned of the event through email discussions and such articles as this one at the time, but as regards published accounts has been able to retrieve only this one.
44 PROVIDE A COPY OF THE SURVEY OF LITERATURE BY THREE PROFESSORS IN THE FACULTY OF MEDICINE, AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND, REFERRED TO IN THE PARENTHESES IN THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF PAGE E-3, WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO STATEMENT OF DEFENSE AND DEFENSE TO COUNTERCLAIM.
Attached: "Sexual abuse counselling: what is the rationale?" A pre-publication copy sent to Dr. Christensen by the second author prior to the events at issue here.
45 IDENTIFY WHAT ADDITIONAL ARTICLES DR. CHRISTENSEN WAS RELYING ON OR REFERRING TO WHEN HE MENTIONED "SUBSEQUENT STUDIES" IN THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF PAGE E-3, WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO STATEMENT OF DEFENSE AND DEFENSE TO COUNTERCLAIM.
At this date Dr. Christensen can identify no other specific studies. But the article attached in response to Undertaking 44 lists some such, and he was relying at least on the reporting there.
46 ADVISE AS TO DR. CHRISTENSEN'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORD "NONADULT" AS USED BY MILTON DIAMOND IN THE ARTICLE TITLED "SELECTED CROSS-GENERATIONAL SEXUAL BEHAVIOR IN TRADITIONAL HAWAI'I: A SEXOLOGICAL ETHNOGRAPHY."
In general, clearly, this word applies to both children and adolescents. It is not clear whether Dr. Diamond had in mind only adolescents when he used it in the passage here referred to (p. 441 of his article). But various other statements in the article, together with Dr. Christensen's understanding that actual pedophilia (a sexual preference for children) was absent in the cultures discussed, suggest that in speaking of "regular erotic preference" just here, he may not have had children in mind.
47 AFTER REVIEWING PORNOGRAPHY, THE OTHER SIDE, ADVISE WHAT PORTIONS OR PASSAGES IN THE BOOK MAY HAVE BEEN BASED ON THE CONTENT OF EXHIBIT D-8.
Dr. Christensen sees this undertaking as being identical to Undertaking 39; see above.
48 IF THE ARTICLE "SEXUAL CALLOUSNESS RE-EXAMINED" WAS NOT THE ARTICLE REFERRED TO IN THE FOOTNOTES FOLLOWING THE ARTICLE TITLED "CULTURAL AND IDEOLOGICAL BIAS IN PORNOGRAPHY RESEARCH," PROVIDE THE ARTICLE THAT IS BEING REFERRED TO IN THAT FOOTNOTE.
Further reading has made it clear that "Sexual callousness re-examined" was the article referred to.
49 PROVIDE A COPY OF THE ARTICLE TITLED "EFFECTS OF PORNOGRAPHY, THE DEBATE CONTINUES."
50 ADVISE AS TO SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITIES TO PARTAKE IN ACTIVITIES THAT DR. CHRISTENSEN OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE PARTAKEN IN THAT HAVE BEEN LOST TO HIM BECAUSE OF THE PUBLICATION OF THE STATEMENTS HE HAS COMPLAINED OF IN THE ARTICLE.
The following further illustrations have come to Dr. Christensen's memory or turned up in searching through surviving communications:
· Before publication, he was working hard to help ECMAS get charitable status and various kinds of funding, including a casino license. ECMAS had strong hopes of setting up an office to which individuals needing help could come. And though he had no specific applications for funding in mind for MERGE or GIEF at that time, he had lists of major funding sources and general plans for making applications for those two as well. But the dispiriting effects of the defamation, on both him and the others, have been so great that as of this date, no such applications have even been completed for submitting, by any of the three organizations. (One project for which funding had already been acquired, a video on husband abuse, was carried to completion by MERGE.)
· For many years, Dr. Christensen has lobbied elected and appointed officials at all three levels of government. However, since the article's publication he has greatly curtailed these activities. One such official in particular (Alan Bolstad, then an Edmonton city councilor) had set up numerous occasions for him and his co-workers to make presentations to other city councilors and to key people from community services and the police. To spare Mr. Bolstad embarrassment, following the defamation Dr. Christensen did not even request him to arrange any more such meetings.
· Dr. Christensen's work has always had as one goal the getting of ideas he has developed and the information he has researched to the public. Two attached emails addressed to John Menear, an Ontario lawyer, reveal a desperate scheme to do so at one point despite his smeared name. (The idea was to use a pen-name and have someone else do the mailing-in. In the end, it was felt that any newspaper would insist on knowing the author's real name, hence the attempt would fail.) Another attached email has been located providing concrete evidence of Dr. Christensen feeling forced to forgo an opportunity for presenting his research and ideas owing to the defamation; it relates to a series of roundtable discussions on family violence held by the Alberta government.
Beyond these specific examples, it must be stressed that ideas for lobbying, publication/publicity and such efforts as fund-raising are presented or occur to him very often. It is impossible to keep track of them all, much less to say which ones he would have pursued had he not felt that there is no real hope until his reputation is restored. He has felt unable to pursue any that would openly expose his name.
51 PROVIDE ANY INSTANCES, ASIDE FROM THE LETTER FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE, WHICH DR. CHRISTENSEN CLAIMS SHOWS THAT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN DENIED TO HIM BY OTHERS BECAUSE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT HE HAS COMPLAINED ABOUT IN HIS STATEMENT OF CLAIM.
Attached is a further discovered letter from MP Roger Gallaway, helping to reveal that he stopped communicating with Dr. Christensen, following the defamation, because faced with the prospect of being linked to him publicly. Senator Anne Cools similarly declined to be publicly associated with Dr. Christensen following the defamation. As both of them had been involved heavily with him in public events in the past, various opportunities needing high-profile help that only they could give were lost. To illustrate that former involvement are attached two press releases and two related photographs.
These examples illustrate clearly the commonsense fact that people in general, and even fearlessly outspoken ones such as these two, shy away from being associated with scandal. This is simply the prudent thing to do, whether or not they themselves have lost respect for the individual defamed. Hence they illustrate Dr. Christensen's reasonableness, following the defamation, in not attempting to deal with other individuals in positions of influence who didn't even know him to begin with.