No evidence of role in drafting illegal settlement

CORNWALL PUBLIC INQUIRY

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

17 January 2009

Posted By TREVOR PRITCHARD, STANDARD-FREEHOLDER

A former assistant Crown attorney told the Cornwall Public Inquiry he had no evidence to suggest Rev. Charles MacDonald had a role in crafting an illegal $32,000 settlement between the church and one of his alleged victims.

"I don't recall seeing anything that made me think Father MacDonald had input into the contents of the agreement," said Lorne McConnery, who completed his fourth and final day on the stand yesterday.

In 2001, McConnery was asked to provide opinions on a number of legal briefs compiled during Project Truth, the four-year investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police into allegations a pedophile clan had preyed on children in the Cornwall area.

One of those briefs alleged there was a wide-ranging conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse allegations in the city.

Six years earlier, MacDonald's attorney, Malcolm MacDonald (no relation) pleaded guilty to obstructing justice for the role he played in a $32,000 settlement involving one of the priest's alleged victims. The settlement contained an illegal clause that kept David Silmser from pursuing criminal charges.

In his July 2001 opinion, McConnery mused whether the lawyer who represented the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese in the settlement, Jacques Leduc, also obstructed justice.

The initial investigation happened before Leduc and Malcolm MacDonald themselves were charged by Project Truth with sexually abusing children.

In light of that new information, McConnery wrote that the pair "could clearly be seen to have their very own personal agenda" in crafting the $32,000 payout.

The abuse charges against the two lawyers were never proven in court.

On Friday, inquiry commissioner Normand Glaude asked McConnery if he ever considered whether Charles MacDonald might have been involved in the obstruction.

"Did I have any evidence that he did anything to ensure this agreement (included an illegal clause)? No I didn't," said McConnery. "Was he the beneficiary of it? He was."

McConnery said he also looked at the actions of the bishop at the time, Eugene LaRocque, but concluded he wasn't involved either. The Ministry of the Attorney General also sought an opinion on the conspiracy allegations from retired Justice David Griffiths, who by that time was in private practice. However, the ministry has claimed solicitor-client privilege over that opinion, and the sections of McConnery's notes that dealt with Griffiths were blacked out.

Charles MacDonald was first charged with sex crimes in 1996, with additional charges involving new complainants added on in 1998 and 2000.

In May 2002, Justice Dan Chilcott decided the priest's right to a timely trial had been violated and stayed all the charges. In his decision, Chilcott blamed former city cop Perry Dunlop for the delay, ruling he had withheld statements and documents "until he had seriously imperiled this prosecution and it was too late to be salvaged."

McConnery, who questioned Dunlop at the May 2002 hearings, described him Friday as an "evasive" witness.

"My recollection is he had a tendency to make blanket, sweeping allegations," said McConnery. "And I just wanted to ensure that I explored them, so that we could see if there were any meat on his allegations."

After McConnery's testimony was finished, the inquiry began to hear from Cosette Chafe, who from 1993 until 2001 managed the ministry's Victim/Witness Assistance Program (VWAP) in Ottawa.

Chafe had helped craft the ministry's protocol for providing support during prosecutions with multiple victims and perpetrators. From 1991 until 1993, she was also involved in the trials that arose after hundreds of victims alleged they were sexually and physically abused by the Christian brothers who ran the St. Joseph's Training School in Alfred, Ont.

In May 2000, Chafe was asked to provide support to victims and witnesses involved in the Leduc and Charles MacDonald trials. It quickly became apparent that setting up a VWAP office in Cornwall in time for those trials would not be possible, Chafe told commission counsel Pierre Dumais.

"Was it an issue of timing, or was it an issue of budget constraints?" asked Dumais.

"Maybe both," said Chafe.

The inquiry is exploring how institutions like the province's justice system handled allegations of historical sexual abuse. Testimony resumes Monday at 9:30 a. m.

---

Comments on this Article.

---

So two lawyers draft a settlement and the client signs the settlement but not one person read what the settlement was about oh yes forgot and a bishop also signs off and he knew nothing. Come on folks even a deaf and blind lab rat would know the difference why were none of those people charged. They found no evidence like hell.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #1 By dodger,

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #2 By luckyred,

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #3 By luckyred,

hey trevor.You don,t have to tell us charles Mcdonald had no role in drafting this ilegal settlement he,s the ped not the lawyer.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #4 By luckyred,

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #5 By luckyred,