Cornwall Standard Freeholder    

Editorial

27 February 2009

Commissioner Normand Glaude next week will begin the daunting task of poring through three years' worth of testimony at the Cornwall Public Inquiry as he writes his report to be delivered by the end of July.

One of the contentious issues he will deal with is the role of former city police officer Perry Dunlop.

Dunlop has been portrayed as both a hero and a villain.

On Wednesday, Frank Horn, Coalition for Action lawyer, told Glaude that Dunlop deserves an apology from a high-profile official for what he went through.

This was in stark contrast to what some of the institutional lawyers had to say about Dunlop's role.

Neil Kozloff, representing the Ontario Provincial Police, said Dunlop was guilty of erecting roadblocks that hampered Project Truth investigators.

Michael Neville, who represents Rev. Charles MacDonald, chastised Dunlop and former MPP Gary Guzzo for fueling rumours of a pedophile clan with a membership that included high-profile citizens.

During the inquiry, the man who fed Dunlop the clan tale testified that he made up the story "to please Perry."

Another victim testified that he was told to put an alleged abuser's name in his affidavit, despite the fact he had never met the man.

Dunlop was criticized for refusing to testify. Some of that criticism came from victims who had the courage to take the stand and relive their horrible experiences.

They, and not Perry Dunlop, are the real heroes. Some of the institutions involved in the inquiry deserve criticism for the way they bungled sexual assault complaints, just as the former police officer deserves criticism for his unauthorized investigation.

Dunlop started out on the right track, but along the way his "doing the right thing" went right off the rails, to the point of hamstringing the OPP Project Truth investigation, not to mention fueling the pedophile clan hysteria that stalked this community and damaged the reputations of many innocent people.

There's certainly no basis for an apology.

Perry Dunlop did really believe in what he was doing, unfortunately he went about it the wrong way, instead of co-operating with the investigators and don't tell me that all the Police Officers in these investigations were all incompetant, he became a loose cannon and had people question people who were not competent to do so in the first place. He lost dearly in this case. His reputation as well as a career with the Police Dept. What did he actually gain except anguish, having had to move to another province, he paid dearly and he did not have to at all, all he had to do was to testify like everyone else who did.