Last night I posted a piece by astrologer, Claire-France Perez, Astrologer To The DC Madam Comments Regarding Her Case And Suicide.

Astrologer, Doreen Gordon (rightly) questioned the ethics of Perez’s disclosure of what would be presumed to be privileged information in a comment. Perez responds:

Dear people,

Debra Jeane Palfrey was clear that we (my partner and I) were going to be writing up her case. I had no idea it would come post-mortem. I was given full permission to write anything I wanted, but had withheld it until after the trial. I naturally read everything about the trial and realized so much of my first impressions about her were true. She had Venus trined Mars, both in their own rulerships or exaltations, which gave her an attitude of “ethics” and high minded politeness, a kind of Mary Poppins primness upon she relied like we might walk on boulders, and not fear their breaking up.

By this I mean that she was somehow isolated from the reality that swirled around her, meaning that she felt she really and truly had committed no crime. This impeded any real progress in making something more positive happen, as the case by the government had plenty of evidence, something we did talk about, but again, was buoyed out of existence by the prim “no way, not me.”

The Washington Madam portrayed herself as “a fighter.” I could believe it, with 7th house Mars in Capricorn, you bet she’s a fighter. The problem was that she had a lack of judgment on that and needed exactly the advice that was being offered. I consider myself among the fired attorneys, after realizing she probably treated everyone on her case in the same insecure way, having no faith, and no one in her life but her aging mother, it was a bitch to be there, and I hoped to help her to shoulder the depth of this despair with a public campaign against those who are equally guilty: The Johns.

DJP was not holding anything back and didn’t ask us to even show what we were writing. We have documented our conversations in email or by recorded telephone.

I take the view that she had become a public figure and more particularly, that now that she was sadly departed, it would be the right moment to reveal the content of our conversations.

I did not counsel with her but once or twice, and realized by November (she came to my house last June) that she was determined to be self-destructive, and stayed out of the on-going conversation with my partner. There, she had asked him to quit putting me into the loop of their conversations, and he went along.

I found out from him the content of several new emails since her trials on which I will be reporting in my blog in the next few days.

She was angry at me, I only found out yesterday. I was disappointed as she said she was “fighting this,” but in fact she knew all along she would self-destruct. In my private conversation with
Elsa, I told her that I had to confess: in my notes I wrote repeatedly “self-destruct” in her motivation.

I too, did not foresee this as a suicide. She was prim, but in a dire confusion of her real position, and her desperate need to know from the astrologers whether she would be convicted motivated her to work with my partner. I had to refrain from answering this very question, but did say that by April “it would be all over.” Because it would not have done anything positive, I retreated from these repeated queries for assurances as I had none, what with the potent Mars opposition since last August when the real hearings, the four-time firings of the attorneys and no follow-up (to bolster her case) investigations forthcoming from Larry Flynt and various other paths revealed no hope.

It was a losing proposition and I held to discretion, though I participated with Le Baraquel in trying to help.

Anyone coming within a certain distance, and who was espousing anything nearing reality was either fired or rejected for “being users.”

I only hope to never violate any confidentiality and take it quite seriously among my clients in particular. But friends can tell you too: I am good for the secret.

In this case, there were none.

In my defense I will say that I had no hope for her case, but saw the much larger issue of her “arrest” and the absolutely “legally” roped, tied, bound, gagged and practically tortured woman as something for the rest of this country to take heed: When the government has its goods on you, “innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t mean jack.

cf

~~
I would add that I am a person with a lot of secrets and Claire-France is a personal friend of mine. I trust her implicitly.