Victims 'damaged' by abuse: Chisholm tells inquiry; Says it explains why witnesses have changed stories

Cornwall Public Inquiry

12 October 2007

Posted By Terri Saunders

The brother-in-law of a former city cop who blew the whistle on historical child sexual abuse in Cornwall said Thursday it's no mystery why some witnesses at the Cornwall Public Inquiry have changed their stories over the years.

"These people have been damaged," said Carson Chisholm. "They were sodomized as children. You expect them to be normal?"

Chisholm was referring to testimony from at least two individuals at the inquiry during which the witnesses said they at times embellished evidence or outright lied to either seek revenge on alleged abusers or give in to pressure being exerted by Chisholm and his brother-in-law, Perry Dunlop.

Chisholm said he's more likely to believe the stories told by the witnesses prior to their attendance before the commission. He said one witness, identified at the inquiry as C-8 in accordance with a publication ban, suffered abuse as a child which has affected him into adulthood.

"That poor fella," said Chisholm. "He is a hardworking guy. You shake his hand, you can feel the callouses. He is incredibly hurt."

Earlier this year, C-8 told the inquiry he embellished his evidence in a criminal trial in 2000 regarding abuse he suffered at the hands of a city elementary teacher. The man initially told investigators some of the abuse occurred during a school trip to Toronto, evidence he later said was added in at the prompting of Dunlop. The man also testified he lied about being abused by a city priest because Dunlop kept insisting some abuse must have occurred at the hands of the clergyman.

Chisholm told the inquiry Thursday he remembers a conversation he had with C-8 when he believes the man confirmed he had been abused by the priest.

"I don't think he was faking it," said Chisholm. "He broke down at his father's funeral about being abused by (the priest)."

A second witness at the inquiry has also testified he made up aspects of the story he's told for years about having witnesses prominent area men involved in a bizarre sexual ritual with young boys.

Ron Leroux told the inquiry he told Dunlop about having witnessed the ritual in an effort to get revenge on his alleged abusers.Chisholm said Thursday he continues to believe in Leroux's original story.

"I think he was telling the truth the first time, for the most part," said Chisholm. "He is another one who is very damaged."

David Sherriff-Scott, an attorney representing the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese, asked Chisholm about the fact C-8 had alleged in the past he was sexually abused by Leroux, claims Leroux has denied.

Sherriff-Scott asked Chisholm why he didn't report C-8 allegations to the police, and Chisholm alluded to the fact he had little faith in the police's ability to fairly investigate such allegations.

Chisholm also said he believed for a long time the two men were relatively close in age and that any sexual contact between them may have been consensual. Chisholm said he has since learned the two men are not close in age, but still believes C-8 would have been over the age of consent at the time of the alleged abuse.

tense moments

Some tense moments occurred when Chisholm was being cross-examined by Danielle Robitaille, an attorney acting for city lawyer Jacques Leduc at the inquiry.

Robitaille was suggesting Chisholm's story about the number of times he had contact with witnesses in Leduc's 2001 trial on sex charges had changed between the time he testified in court in 2004 and his testimony at the inquiry.

"What's the relevance of all this?" asked Comm. Normand Glaude. "Yeah," said Chisholm. "What's the relevance?"

"No," Glaude said to Chisholm. "You stay quiet."

"I'm trying to see if his evidence today is the same as it was back then," said Robitaille. "I'm suggesting he changed his evidence."

"I don't quite see it that way," said Glaude.

The inquiry will continue today at 9:30 a.m.