Cornwall Standard Freeholder

19 January 2010

The former Cornwall cop whose refusal to testify became one of the missing links for the Cornwall Public Inquiry, was a no-show in Toronto court Monday after filing an appeal regarding his contempt of court convictions.

The Canadian Press reported Sunday the Crown didn't notify Dunlop of the hearing date and had not been successful in attempts to reach him over the past week, according to information in Dunlop's court file.

According to the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Dunlop will still have 14 days to make oral arguments, or he could proceed with the case in writing.

Dunlop, who is self-represented for the appeal, served a total of seven months in jail on criminal and civil charges for refusing the summons to testify.

According to the CP report, in his appeal, Dunlop, who now lives in Duncan, B.C., said his incarceration amounted to "cruel and unusual punishment."

Lawyers for the inquiry's commissioner and the Crown write in court documents that there are no legal grounds to overturn the contempt findings because Dunlop has not given a lawful excuse for his refusal to testify.

 Why does this not surprise me?

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #1 By 2 sides 2 a story

Because you refuse to believe anything about there being pedophiles in Cornwall. Put your blinders back on and go back to sleep.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #2 By dodger

Now start investrigating the claims of the victims and investigate thoroughly do not lose evidence do not refuse evidence and most of all everyone do their jobs the way the law says it is supposed ot be doen no covering up for the church or the CAS or anyone else that has abused children.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #3 By dodger

 Dunlop with his refusal to testify at a hearing that he was subpoened to failed the victims in this pedophile ring. He and Judge Guzzo were blow hards and failed to step up to the plate. An investigation should be done if his action or inaction had an effect on the inquiry. His investigation which was done while he was bieng paid by the taxpayers of Cornwall as a police officer should be made public. He was a person in authority as a police officer when he interviewed these victims. We should know if notes were taken-tapes made of these interviews and if not why not then he failed those victims that put thier trust in him as a police officer. Would you not want it revealed that you did a crack up job or were you afraid that testifying might reveal that you did a poor investigation. I dont think that is too hard to figure out which one you would not want revealed. He is not a hero in my books.

I will keep this short and sweet. What Perry did in the years leading up to the inquiry was great and what the city needed. However since then he has broken the law. He can not pick which laws he believes in and which ones he doesn't. When you do that, you go to jail. If he had testified he would have never gone to jail. Also, the last time I check prison was not considered cruel and unusual punishment so I hope his silly attempt to remove his conviction does not waste too much of my tax dollars.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #6 By WestEndRep

Perry Dunlop cannot keep track of or attend an appeal he launched. Perry Dunlop will not participate in an inquiry he wanted and pushed for. Perry Dunlop has no faith in anyone but himself, however there were mounds of evidence showing that he coerced victims into lying or exaggerating what occurred to serve his own agenda. Perry the self-appointed hero has failed everyone, but especially the victims. He is far from courageous, and anyone who knows him well, knows how self-centered he can be. He is also well suited to Helen who is the same. I continue to feel for all victims of sexual and physical abuse, and hope justice will be served. I think however that you may be misguided in believing Perry to be your hero. Perry like Helen liked the attention and continues to do what is good for Perry.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #7 By Cornwallresident

I don't understand why some of the messages have been removed or censored, when this last one by Cornwallresident attacks someone with accusations I suspect they would not support in court.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #8 By majekin

Whatever anyone thinks of Mr Dunlop the facts are the abusers of these children are still living here in Cornwall and Catholic church officials, police officials and politicians along with the CAS know who they are and continue to protect them.

The Archbishop is aware of several settlements made by the diocese and who those responsible are but sin against God and the community by not revealing the names. Cornwall is ill served by people like him and others that seem to think they alone can judge who is punished and who is not.

No wonder people from out of town snicker and call the city the cornhole capital of Canada.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #9 By the Coach

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did I, as a tax payer, not just payout millions to know the truth? It's over ! Yes, there were victims, No, there was no ring, and truth be told, I did not see any hero's. Many places where agencies failed would be a fair statement. It's a must to protect our right to speak, and we do, but we must not allow a ignoramus the right to slander. I think it is time Catholic's, police officials, CAS, politicians go after the people who don't know the difference between the right to speak and the right to slander. I wonder if "the coach " would be willing to print their name and address, after their remarks? Didn't think so.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #10 By Mr&MrsUwho

Our Mayor must have taken a speed reading course to have read the FULL report in one day that he was able to make a pronouncement that there was no ring. On page #774 of the report is the following quote..."There is no technical definition of a "pedophile ring." To the extent that term refers to a group of individuals-some of whom know each other-who are accused of sexually abusing young people, there was evidence that such an entity existed in Cornwall"

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #11 By wildone

Lawyer David M. Humphrey (acting for our Attorney General), quoted outside Divisional Court during one of Perrys' appearances..."The object of the six month jail sentence is to coerce Mr. Dunlop to testify."

Now tell me.....Where do our rights stand?

John Mac Donald

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #12 By wildone

If I was Perry Dunlop, after all he went through, I wouldn't ever go to Cornwall again.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #13 By majekin

to/iamjustacombiner.You have no need to apoligize to me,your opoinions are your opoinions.as you have stated on the previse article(slap in the face].You state i have no defence and that is why you are compeled to stand up for gilf gregain.You also have great admirations for gilf gregain.I a,m not on defence I a,m on offence and its full speed ahead.I have given my email to you which you have replyed and if anyone wishs to email me feel free.luckyred1199@hotmail.com

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #14 By luckyred,

The right NOT to speak? Never heard of it . When questioned by an authority, whether that be a parent, a teacher, the police or the courts, saying "no" always brings consequences to your action. Many time you may also have a moral obligation. I suppose you have that right as long as you are willing to face the consequences. Once again John, I understand your point of view. No one likes to see someone forced to testify. It works a whole lot better when a moral sense of duty dictate the action.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #15 By Mr&MrsUwho

I have heard of the right NOT TO SPEAK.Were have you been. The inquirey gave the right NOT TO SPEAK.To everyone, just ask the {alleged]perpatraitors.For they refused to speak.Hope there in jail for refusing.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #16 By luckyred

Mr&MrsUwho what the hell are you a total moron or just another windbag with blinders on. Or were you just another altar boy or girl that did not get molested by the Priest that was accused. So if it did not happen tyo you then it could not have happened to anyone else.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #17 By dodger

Cornwallresident if Perry Dunlop had done what was good for himself he woul;d have walked away and put blinders on like all the other officials that covered up for the travesty that went on. It appears you hold a grudge against the Dunlops what did they step on a few of your pedophile friends toes.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #18 By dodger

Patrick203 were you or have you ever been a victim of these travesties if you have not been a victim then you really cannot speak for the victims.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #19 By dodger

WestEndRep prison is not cruel and unusual punishment unless the person is a whistleblower. A convicted criminal of real criminal offences should be jailed and punished.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #20 By dodger

I try to break things down to their simplest form. Let's start at the beginning...David Silmser reports to police that he was abused by Charles MacDonald and Ken Seguin. Three supposedly smart lawyers are involved in David signing an illegal document (Malcolm McDonald, Jacques Leduc and Sean Adams). Pretty clear so far, these are all facts. Now let's see where this goes. Charles MacDonald (charged and walks on an 11b charter motion), Malcolm McDonald (lawyer representing Ken Seguin and Charles MacDonald-charged, dies before trial), Ken Seguin (commits suicide-FOI request would tell how many settlements were paid to his victims), Jacques Leduc (lawyer for the diocese-charged and walks on a non-disclosure issue). So here is what we have, Dave surrounded by 4 people charged with abusing young men (pedophiles-so we are clear). Now, just how many pedophiles constitutes a pedophile ring?

John Mac Donald

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #21 By wildone

We didn't need an inquiry, a Hollywood scrpit writer could not write this stuff. We just needed good old fashioned common sense.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #22 By wildone

you tell them wildone

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #23 By dodger,

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #24 By Patrick203

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #25 By wildone