City Police Had "Moral Obligation" To Inform: Robert

February 12, 2008 — Cornwall Police had a "moral obligation" to inform the local probation and parole office of a sex abuse allegation against a probation officer. That statement from former Area Manager Emile Robert who deflected questions at the Cornwall Public Inquiry yesterday. Former probation officer Ken Seguin has been accused of sexually abusing clients on probation. He was never charged and he committed suicide in 1993. Last week, Robert testified he was not aware of the allegation until after Seguin's death and said he would have taken action if he had known about it. Cornwall Police lawyer Peter Manderville suggested the police had good reason not to tell Robert about the complaint because Seguin was not being actively investigated at the time. Manderville suggested a false allegation can ruin someone's life. Speaking through a translator, Robert says the police will act as they will but as an employer he was expecting to have better cooperation with the police force. Hearings are set to resume at 9:30 this morning.

Cops should have spoken up: Robert

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

12 February 2008

Posted By Trevor Pritchard

Police had a "moral obligation" to inform the city's probation office of an unsubstantiated sexual abuse allegation against one of its employees, the former manager of that office told the Cornwall Public Inquiry Monday.

Emile Robert testified he would have suspended Ken Seguin and investigated his probation work had city police revealed the December 1992 allegation made against him by David Silmser, a former probationer.

"If it turned out to be a rotten apple, I would have gotten rid of it," said Robert, who managed the Cornwall Probation and Parole office from 1985 to 1998.

Seguin was the subject of numerous sexual abuse allegations made by former probationers. He committed suicide in 1993 and was never charged with any crime.

Robert testified last Friday that on the afternoon of Seguin's death, his administrative assistant told him there were rumours going around the office that Seguin was being investigated by city police.

Robert said he paid a visit to two Cornwall police officers - Luc Brunet and Heidi Sebalj - to discuss those rumours, and that during that meeting he was shown a copy of Silmser's allegation.

But Peter Manderville, an attorney representing the Cornwall Community Police Service, repeatedly questioned Robert's memory of the supposed discussion Monday afternoon during an occasionally heated cross-examination.

Referring to Brunet's handwritten notes, Manderville suggested the only meeting Robert had with city police was actually in December 1994, more than a year after Seguin's death.

That meeting, said Manderville, had to do with charges being laid against Nelson Barque, another former Cornwall probation officer.

Barque pleaded guilty in 1995 to sexually abusing a probationer. He would also commit suicide in 1998.

Manderville suggested to Robert that he had his dates mixed up. He promised that when Brunet took the stand, he would testify police had no record of the encounter as Robert remembered it.

"Officer Brunet has no notes of any alleged meeting with you (about Ken Seguin)," Manderville said. "Nor does officer Sebalj."

"Sir, I recall quite clearly having seen the statement of Mr. Silmser. I had it in my hands," Robert responded.

Manderville said that if Robert's recollection was accurate, Brunet and Sebalj would have told him there was no investigation under way into the allegation against Seguin.

Divulging unproven allegations to any employer, Manderville suggested, could be "ruinous" to a person's career.

Even if the Ministry of Correctional Services - as it was then known - had launched its own investigation into Seguin's actions, the reason for the probe would eventually make its way throughout the office, he said.

"You would agree with me, I take it, that the police have some very good reasons for not telling an employer about unsubstantiated allegations?" Manderville asked Robert.

"The police will act as they will," Robert replied. "I was expecting, as a partner in justice, to have better co-operation from the police force."

Other attorneys who cross-examined Robert continued to dissect his workplace relationship with Seguin - a popular topic since ministry officials and employees began testifying at the inquiry last November.

According to some of Seguin's colleagues, Robert showed favouritism towards Seguin and often treated him more leniently than he did other probation officers.

Allan Manson, an attorney representing the Citizens for Community Renewal, brought up two memos from 1987 and 1989 that Seguin sent Robert.

In the 1987 document, Seguin told Robert he would be working later hours to accommodate some of his probationers who had jobs during the daytime.

Two years later, Seguin wrote again to Robert, advising him he would be renting a room in his home to Gerald Renshaw, a former probationer.

Renshaw has testified Seguin sexually abused him over a 12-year period while he was in his teens and early 20s.

It seemed odd, Manson suggested, that Seguin would be dictating the conditions of his job - rather than asking permission - to his superior.

"It looks like you let Mr. Seguin do whatever he wanted to do," said Manson.

Robert responded that the ministry's policy in both situations was that employees simply had to inform their superiors, not ask for permission.

"I don't agree with you, sir," Robert said.

The inquiry is expected to hear from a new witness, Claude Legault, when it resumes this morning.

Legault succeeded Robert as area manager of the Cornwall office.

tpritchard@standard-freeholder.com