My Second Demand for Retraction

In September of 2004, I sent this second letter to JAMES LLOYD and SUSAN LENOX Doing Business As CHRISTIAN MEDIA.

From:

LINDA KRISTICH

(ADDRESS REDACTED)

Jacksonville, Oregon, 97530

September 17, 2004

To: JAMES LLOYD and SUSAN LENOX dba CHRISTIAN MEDIA

Second demand for retraction pursuant to ORS § 31.215; and the general laws of the State of Oregon.

Dear Mr. Lloyd and Ms. Lenox:

Pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute § 31.215; and the general laws of the State of Oregon, this letter shall constitute a second demand for a retraction as specified below pursuant to the statutes and general laws cited above.

This letter is being served on you in order to supplement the previous demand for a retraction of any mention of me in your article titled "The Rise and Fall of Craig Portwood".

In paragraph 10 of the article titled "The Rise and Fall of Craig Portwood" which you still have posted on your website CHRISTIANMEDIARESEARCH.COM, James Lloyd wrote: That I "would build a house somewhere in the vicinity of Christian Media". He implied that I planned to build "a survivalist oriented structure that would be custom designed to be able to deflect the effects of the HAARP technology". Are you prepared to present credible witnesses to back up your assertion?

In paragraph 13 of the article, James Lloyd wrote: "We learned that Linda Kristich's husband, a man named James Kristich, had recently inherited a substantial amount of money, and his wife Linda was attempting to gain a sizeable portion of those funds by divorcing her husband. Are you prepared to prove that statement?

In paragraph 18 of the article, James Lloyd wrote "Linda had just become separated from her Michigan based husband in order to meet Craig at the event." This statement is a complete and intentional misrepresentation of the facts, as you were aware that I was not attending that event to "meet Craig", and I had not become "separated" from my husband at that time, but was a scheduled speaker at the event, and my participation in the event had been publicized for at least two (2) months prior. Further, your comment about my "Michigan based husband " implies that I have more than one husband. Are you prepared to defend that statement in court?

My name is prominent on every major search engine internationally in connection with the article you have posted on your CHRISTIANMEDIARESEARCH.COM website. Your reckless disregard for the facts as relate to my personal character has severely hampered my ability to acquire employment.

I ask you again, what have I ever done to harm you? What have I written to defame either of you dba CHRISTIAN MEDIA?

There are many other statements which I have been documenting over the course of the last 23 months, which refer to me in derogatory, defamatory terms on your broadcast.

You may or may not realize that the more than 1,000 hours of live broadcasts you have done since your campaign of assassination of my good name began, have been archived and are being transcribed. This is in addition to the many hours broadcast on your network by Susan Lenox, Rick Walters, Ralph Haaff, and Kathy Haaff.

Do you realize just how many times you have cavalierly trashed my good reputation on your "show"? Perhaps nothing short of a recitation of these false, unprivileged, and defamatory statements in Court will jog your memory.

I also have information that someone has made contact with my ex-husband's lawyer in an effort to cause me grief. He and I do communicate freely, and should I discover that you or another acting on your behalf is behind these attempts to antagonize him, you can be certain I will pursue the matter to conclusion.

Also, it has come to my attention that you have stolen my last mailed communication to you.

Mail theft is a serious Federal crime -- a felony punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a $5,000 fine for each piece of stolen mail.

I sent you a Certified letter bearing the serial number 7002-0510-0000-6561-9826, dated August 26, 2004, which I am told was not delivered but stolen, and I am told that you have already admitted to a least one United States Postal Service Employee that you have it in your possession. You can expect her to be subpoenaed to testify to this.

Another copy of that letter is enclosed in this communication.

Certified mail is defined in United States Postal Service Publication 32, dated May 1997, as "A special service that provides the sender with a receipt at the time of mailing; a record of delivery is kept at the post office of address."

The Post Office in Jacksonville has no record of delivery, as you took possession of it without authorization. By this fraudulent act of seizing "accountable mail" without authorization, you are in violation of Title 18, United States Code sections 1701, 1702, 1707, and 1708, each punishable as separate Federal offenses.

They are all Felonies.

I am now obligated to file a formal complaint (Form 2016) with the Postal Inspector. I have also informed the local Postmaster, and I have no doubt that they will likewise move to protect themselves and limit their liability.

It is so sad to me that you have brought all this trouble upon yourselves simply because you consistently refuse to do the right thing, but you alone must face the consequences of your reckless behavior.

As stated previously, pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute § 31.215; and the general laws of the State of Oregon, this letter shall constitute a second demand for a retraction as specified above pursuant to the statutes and general laws cited above.

So that you do not labor under the illusion that I have not the personal resolve to press this matter to conclusion I will tell you candidly that with each passing day that you refuse to cease your defamatory behavior which continues to profoundly tarnish my good name and reputation, and your continual improper efforts to hinder a just resolution of this issue, you only compound the difficulty you have caused yourself, as I grow more resolute in my determination to defend myself and my claims against you.

If you do not yet grasp the gravity of this communication, you should contact a lawyer who may be helpful in explaining the depth of your culpability to you, and the nature of the legal action which to me seems unavoidable.

Sincerely,

____________________________

Linda Kristich