JENNIFER THOMPSON & MONKEY C MEDIA
An open letter to Jennifer Thompson, platform website developer for Dianna Bonny, trading as Monkey Media.
Your personal website advertises you as a coach, researcher, public speaker and cheerleader. As a researcher I trust you are aware of your own clients’ published materials and the content your clients put onto the platforms you supply.
You add “accountability” is part of your philosophy.
We have serious concerns about your claims. We wish to give you the opportunity to explain your “accountability” in providing Dianna Bonny with the platform that has enabled her to denigrate a tragic victim of suicide with weekly blogs for over a year. We would like you to explain your “accountability” regarding the suffering caused by the blogs to the victim’s family and friends.
In your services to promote Dianna Bonny online you must have seen my own website, which describes Dianna’s behavior. It has had over 70,000 viewings. It contains a terribly sad letter from the suicide victim’s mother describing Dianna’s behavior to the family.
In case you have been too busy to read this sorry saga I have summarized it below:
Three years ago Dianna signed and issued a restraining order on her husband, whom she was divorcing. Under penalty of perjury, Dianna stated that her husband had attacked her, abused their children, stolen $500,000 from his employer, was capable of kidnapping and shooting his children, was capable of harming the family pets, was an alcoholic, and was planning to live abroad taking the family wealth.
Dianna’s husband told her that a divorce would harm the whole family and create financial problems for their children. However she served him with divorce papers and he then attempted suicide. He was rescued just in time with the help of his family in England who alerted the local police to save him. He was hospitalized for his own safety but discharged himself a few days later to live in one of his two other homes. He was still on hospital medications but his doctors did not classify him as a risk to others.
The day after he left hospital Dianna issued a restraining order, which not only contained the above allegations but denied him the use of his passport to travel to his family abroad and recover. Dianna’s restraining order included a 12-month course for wife battery. A few hours later he committed suicide, leaving a note for his family repudiating all Dianna’s serious allegations, saying he had been driven into a corner by his wife and could take no more. He left behind three children whom he loved dearly, three homes with equity, and a suicide insurance pay-out of $750,000.
As Dianna’s divorce had not been finalized, she took possession of his body and cremated him with no funeral or memorial service. His mother, aunt, brothers, sister and other family members were given no time to put his body to rest. Dianna told them that her husband had killed himself due to three years tax arrears problems. Yet there was no evidence of this in probate records. However probate records showed Dianna made inaccurate statements and procedural irregularities, which required numerous corrections.
His mother, brothers, sister and friends questioned these matters. Dianna threatened them with legal sanctions for harassment and instructed the family to make all future correspondence with her and her children via her lawyers.
For over two years Dianna refused to tell her husband’s family members where she had put her husband’s remains. She joined a “writing skills” club and hired your firm, Monkey C Media, to promote herself as a “self-help guru”. Her regular blogs online have continued to denigrate her husband and promote herself as a role model “survivor” from whom others could learn a great deal.
Here’s an example from Dianna’s blog (I Burned My Wedding Dress) where she wrote about:
“A fragile piece of cloth …”
“The hopes that caught in my throat as I took his hand at the altar …”
It describes a fictional story as if it were fact.
Sadly her memory failed her and her innuendos were equally false.
There was no dress. She wore a two-piece suit, the skirt just below the knees, and a jacket with a peplum waist.
The suit was made up into two pieces and was substantial, not fragile silk.
There was no altar.They were married in a registry office in front of a plain table.
It is incredibly upsetting for a mother to read regular inaccurate online blog postings about her son who committed suicide. Her husband’s frail 80-year-old mother finally published an open letter on my website that asked Dianna where she had put her son’s remains. The victim’s mother also asked Dianna to stop denigrating her dead son online for the sake of his three children.
Dianna attempted to barter her husband’s remains in exchange for the closure of my website. I was given that letter. Her strategy failed, and she was finally obliged under pressure of my website readership to return her husband’s remains to his mother.
All the above can be verified from public records and correspondence that I have seen.
You cannot begin to imagine the hurt Dianna has caused to the family of her husband, nor the impact of her actions on the future of her children. Her online actions and your support may have a high price.
So, Jennifer Thompson, WHY have you been providing Dianna with a public platform to promote her?
It is very strange to find a “PR expert” public speaker and coach to be providing the platform and support for a campaign of online denigration against a person who committed suicide under tragic circumstances.
Please consider your position as a publicist. Please let us know your views about responsible online “accountability” regarding all this, and allow other readers to comment.
Some of the many readers of your website and mine will have informed opinions to share. They can tell us something about the consequences of online blogging with misleading information.
“Communication experts” should be leading the way with responsible, accurate and fair reporting. Should those who unfairly denigrate the dead and who hurt innocent people deserve to keep their freedom of expression?