Witnesses not on trial: Glaude 

Cornwall Standard-Freeholder 

Terri Saunders 

Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 10:00

Front Page - A lawyer for a city priest accused of sexually abusing young boys in the 1960s and 1970s was told he will not be permitted to use the Cornwall Public Inquiry to prove his client's innocence. 

Rev. Charles MacDonald was charged in 1996 with a number of sex-related offences but following six years of delays, those charges were stayed in 2002 when a judge determined it had taken too long to bring the matter to trial. 

On Monday, Dominic Lamb continued his cross-examination of David Silmser, a man who says he was abused by MacDonald while serving as an altar boy at St. Columban's Church. 

Lamb was asking Silmser about problems with his memory regarding specific details about the alleged abuse when Comm. Normand Glaude stepped in and suggested the lawyer was out of bounds in his questioning. 

"Are you trying to prove (MacDonald) innocent?" asked Glaude. The judge asked Lamb why he was attempting to illustrate Silmser's memory issues, to which Lamb responded he was merely trying to show that perhaps agencies such as police forces were correct in the way they handled Silmser's allegations.

"It's to show the responses were appropriate," Lamb said. 

"You are going to have to convince me you should be shouldering that responsibility," said Glaude. "I believe it's irrelevant to your client's interests." 

David Sherriff-Scott, an attorney representing the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese, said accused person's who have standing at the inquiry should be given more leeway in terms of cross-examination than institutions. 

"Their interests are very broad," said Sherriff-Scott. "There should be an opportunity to point out shortcomings in evidence." 

Putting questions to Silmser about his memory regarding specifics of the circumstances surrounding the alleged abuse and any discrepancies in his testimony during ensuing court appearances could be viewed as an attempt to discredit the witness, Silmser's lawyer said. 

"The sole purpose is to undermine the veracity of this witness' account," said Culic. 

Earlier in the afternoon, Culic also suggested lawyers for various parties with standing at the inquiry may be eager to see Silmser leave the witness stand and not return. 

On Thursday of last week, Silmser was being cross-examined by Lamb when he abruptly left the stand. Following his departure from the hearings room, it was uncertain whether he would come back to The Weave Shed and complete cross-examination. 

In most court proceedings, testimony given by a witness without complete cross-examination could be grounds to have the witness' entire testimony taken off the record.

At the start of hearings Monday, Culic suggested attempts by some parties to attack Silmser's credibility or call into question his memory of past events could result in Silmser deciding not to finish cross-examination. 

"This may be an effort to drive him from the stand," said Culic. "Then, all of his testimony would have to be expunged from the record." 

Glaude seemed to take issue with Culic's suggestion anybody in the room is trying to derail proceedings in such a fashion.

"Some people may take umbrage with a suggestion there's a conspiracy to drive him from the stand," Glaude said. "Counsel have acted not only appropriately but with sensitivity for witnesses who have been here to date." 

In preparing to bring Silmser back to the witness stand, Glaude allowed Culic's request to shift around the order in which parties participate in cross-examination. 

At the start of hearings last year, all of the parties agreed to an order which placed institutions such as the diocese and police services, and MacDonald, ahead of others such as school boards. 

Glaude agreed to place parties expected to ask "less evocative" questions near the front of the line.

Culic had also requested parties refrain from asking duplicate questions and that documents expected to be put to Silmser are reviewed to determine their relevance. 

Glaude said he would intervene on the part of the witness in order to ensure cross-examination is conducted properly and in fairness to the witness. 

Glaude also reminded Lamb there have been many times in the past when lawyers for MacDonald have suggested their client is not on trial at this inquiry and must be treated accordingly. 

"Now, we're going to change that around," said Glaude. "None of the witnesses are on trial."

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