Saturday, March 21, 2009

Letter from Zucker's Lawyers at the CAMH

OII has received a request from Ken Zucker's representatives to remove the information about certain allegations against Zucker. It is important to note that OII never published any false statements or misleading information on the page in question. OII published the fact that the president of OII, Curtis E. Hinkle, reported that OII had been contacted by Noriko Matsuyama making certain allegations against Zucker and in compliance with the law, Curtis E. Hinkle further reported to WPATH and other authorities that it had received the allegations from Ms. Matsuyama. OII felt that WPATH was one of the organisations which should be informed since Ken Zucker is one of their professional members. However, Curtis Hinkle, the founder of OII, has lodged complaints against Ken Zucker concerning many different ethical issues and this is not the main issue of the charges currently underder investigation. We have removed our reference to the allegations made by Noriko Matsuyama against Dr. Zucker.

To read the letter:
Click here
Also note:
a) Although it states that Zucker "never treated anyone named Noriko Matsuyama", we do not see how the person whom Zucker allegedly treated in childhood went by that name years ago before transitioning.
b) It is very odd for a first letter to OII to state, "As we have stated many times previously..." since OII has never received any communications from Zucker or his attorneys.
c) The OII Open Letter to WPATH has been online since the early summer of 2008. Zucker and his WPATH colleagues knew about it all that time, but Zucker has not complained to OII about it until now. So why now? It appears that Zucker is trying to inimidate Mr. Curtis Hinkle for making charges against him involving many other issues not related to this particular issue. Zucker waited until after the complaints were filed. As a matter of fact, his legal representatives wrote a letter to Dr. Lynn Conway for linking to that webpage but did not write to Mr. Hinkle until the investigation was under consideration.


  1. The problem is the allegation by Zucker/CAMH lawyers, because they said the person OII mentioned do not exists.

    Obviously the main subject is the investigation and not OII.

  2. I think its great that Camh is in truble with the law.