Personnel reference standards and integrity

Character Reference on Behalf of Mr. Parker

Your Honor:

This correspondence is intended to serve as a character reference for Mr. Parker. Mr. Parker did not himself solicit my reference. Rather, I have elected to speak on his behalf, as he is an honorable man whom I know quite well. And indeed, it is under rather unfortunate circumstances that I am forced to make this character reference. If it were a circumstance of my choosing, it would be to endorse a commendation for Mr. Parker's fine service and diligent commitment to our organization.

As his employer and his friend, I have been fortunate to have Mr. Parker's abilities and person at my disposal. During the four years he has spent here, he has carved out a deserved reputation as a man of high integrity and observable moral fiber. He has conducted his everyday responsibilities here with full transparency, welcoming observation, performing well under observation and demonstrating consistent compatibility with co-workers, team-members and superiors.

Likewise, Mr. Parker has demonstrated both through his everyday actions and through his behavior under duress that he is driven by honesty. This is true even to the extent that Mr. Parker is loathe to tolerate dishonesty in organizational proceedings when they may occur around him. He would demonstrate as much by actively reporting instances in recent history where he observed others engaged in stealing of organizational resources. In this instance, Parker uniquely stepped forward at considerable risk to his own reputation and job security in order to identity individuals that were exploiting the organization and serving to its internal detriment.

Having electively stepped forward as a whistleblower in the face of unethical behavior, Mr. Parker has already demonstrated his desire to keep our company free from such misconduct. This is to make the case that in addition to the character implications of one thusly opposed to malfeasant or unethical behavior, Mr. Parker is quite unlikely to have placed himself in any position of vulnerability by inciting the hostility of others were it the case that he had some such crimes to hide. His clean record and virtuous service were sufficient to insulate him from criticism as he worked to make our place of business better and more efficient.

It is thus that I find impossible to concede the notion that Mr. Parker is any way guilty of the transgressions for which he is accused. The allegation before my colleague is that he is guilty of falsifying an official document, a violation for which he has been threatened with dismissal. In my time of knowing him, and in the perception of all that know him well, Mr. Parker has conducted his own professional development with hard work, dedication and an unwavering discipline which I have never seen lapse. The allegations against Mr. Parker are false, and furthermore, defy any sense of logic with respect to the history of the man in question. To suggest that he might have determined to yield all which he had worked for with no scintilla of ethical divergence by a single and senseless act such as that for which he is accused.

With his well-earned career and excellent reputation now at stake with this judgment, I implore a reconsideration of Mr. Parker's record and the nature of the case against him. First and foremost, I believe that the legal ramifications of this case must afford Mr. Parker an advantage in consideration, primarily based on the lack of concrete evidence against him. I will spare you the details of this shortage of concrete evidence, which will most assuredly be made clearer with any further hearings or proceedings against Mr. Parker.

I simply ask you to keep this consideration foremost in your mind as the case against him moves forward. There is a preponderance of the evidence which circumstantially appears to legitimize at least pressing forward with the case. However, this is truly the bare minimum of available evidence against any party. It is hardly a case of certainty such as seems to be implied by the professional consequences already facing Mr. Parker. Taking into consideration that the case against Mr. Parker is somewhat flimsy, and reflecting upon Mr. Parker's history here and his generally commendable character, it should seem increasingly apparent that this is not a man deserving of our skepticism or scrutiny.