Lawyer suggests Ron Leroux coined the phrase 'clan of pedophiles'

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

26 October 2007

Terri Saunders

Ron Leroux was the person who first uttered the words "clan of pedophiles" to describe what was going on in Cornwall, a lawyer told the Cornwall Public Inquiry Thursday.

"That would have been Mr. Leroux's phrase," said Charles Bourgeois. "So, he's responsible for coining that phrase?" asked Allan Manson, a lawyer representing the Citizens for Community Renewal at the inquiry.

"Yes," said Bourgeois.

For many years, the Cornwall community has found itself at the heart of a scandal which gained national and international attention when alleged victims of abuse, including Leroux, suggested a "clan" of prominent area men were systematically sexually abusing children and helping each other cover up their crimes.

When he was on the stand at the inquiry in June, Leroux was adamant he was not the person who came up with the phrase and suggested it was added into sworn affidavits signed by him by either former city cop Perry Dunlop or Bourgeois, a Newmarket, Ont. lawyer who acted for Dunlop in 1996 when the former cop sued the city police force and the diocese for tens of millions of dollars.

"Those words - 'clan of pedophiles' - those words didn't come from me," said Leroux, who told the commission Dunlop and Bourgeois drafted affidavits later signed by Leroux. "I didn't orchestrate this."

Bourgeois said Thursday he also isn't convinced Leroux told the whole truth when he testified at the inquiry he lied in the past about having seen prominent area men engaged in ritualistic sexual abuse of children.

Bourgeois said he believes the truth of the situation is what Leroux would have told him and Dunlop more than a decade ago. He also said he trusted information he received years ago from another witness, known at the inquiry as C-8 due to a publication ban, was the truth. In affidavits sworn before Dunlop, C-8 alleged he was sexually assaulted by Rev. Charles MacDonald. He later recanted those allegations, saying the abuse never happened.

"Your assessment of C-8 at that time was that he was truthful?" asked Michael Neville, a lawyer representing MacDonald at the inquiry.

"Yes," said Bourgeois.

"What investigation did you do . . . to ensure these details were true?" asked Neville. "Did you do any?"

"No," said Bourgeois.

Comm. Normand Glaude stepped in to suggest it may be the normal practise of lawyers in the course of civil litigation to accept sworn affidavits from individuals without conducting an independent investigation of the claims.

"You would go out and hire a detective and verify all of the information in the affidavits?" Glaude asked Neville.

"I certainly would," said the lawyer.

Bourgeois also testified he believed Dunlop and his brother-in-law, Carson Chisholm, were steadfast in their quest to protect children from harm.

"He (Dunlop) was an individual who was emotionally conflicted in that he felt he had lost his career, which he enjoyed, and his faith had been, according to him, compromised," said Bourgeois. "(Chisholm) was a crutch for the Dunlop family. When they were feeling down, he would help out. He supported them. He believed in their cause. He was feeling like he was doing the right thing."

Bourgeois was asked repeatedly if he had any documentation related to the time during which he served as Dunlop's lawyer, to which he continuously replied he did not, suggested anything he had has been given over to Dunlop, lost or destroyed.