I am trying to keep abreast of the unfolding sex abuse scandal in Europe.  Since it is impossible to keep on top of all the coverage I will post articles which I think best reflect what is going on.  Keep an eye on New to the Site on the Home page.

While I am not thrilled with what is coming out of the Catholic scandal virtually all over Europe I must admit that I am thankful that it is happening.  If Church officials refuse to clean house on their own, then, unfortunately, it had to come to this. 

Meanwhile, how many children world wide have been sexually abused by clergy who were given a ’second chance’ ? or a third? or a fourth? 

I am a firm believer that Roman Catholics have a right to know if the priest in the sanctuary is a sexual predator.  Common sense says that it is impossible for parents to adequately protect their children if, unbeknownst to them, a known predatory priest has been dumped on them by their bishop and is dipsy-doodling freely around the diocese.

In that vein I am waiting with baited breath for the bishops of Canada to follow the lead of some their brother bishops in Europe, specifically to invite victims of sexual abuse to come forward,  (I suggest that the victims report first to police and then to the diocese.)  I am also waiting for the day when all those in the Church in Canada who allowed known or suspect clerical predators to function in dioceses will be held accountible.

 I also wait with baited breath for the Canadian bishops to publish the names of every known clerical sexual predator in their diocese, both those who were charged and convicted and quietly sent off to another diocese, and those who were reported and their victims quietly paid off, and those who were shipped out of a diocese and sometimes out of the country with a promise that charges would not be laid if they stayed away, and those who were shipped into Canada from afar to elude whispers, scandal and/or exposure on their homefront.

I am waiting with baited breath for our Canadian bishops to say Enough!

I am waiting.

Yes, I do believe that Catholics - and non-Catholics -  have a right to know when a clerical molester is in their midst, a sexual predator whom the powers that be have opted to recycle into another parish, or another diocese, or a hospital as chaplain, or a seminary or university for further studies, or another country.  I beleieve they also have a right to know when a priest from their diocese has been ‘caught” and shipped away.  That information has not been readily available in Canada.  Far from it.  Now is the time.  If transparency is the name of the game, let the games finally begin.

And I might add that it is not good enough to let a one or two parishioners know that “Father” had a little problem.  For starters, Father should be laicized, but, barring doing the right thing, if “Father” is to be recyled let’s give all parishioners opportunity to decide for themsleves if they personally want to have a sexual predator in their sanctuary, and/or saying Mass, and/or hearing confessions, and/or doing or studying canon law, and/or working in the diocesan centre, or the hospital, or the convent or the old folks home.

 I recall some years back phoning the diocesan centre in Ottawa to find out where convicted molester Father Michael Mullins was.  (Mullins, an Irish man incarinated in the Archdiocese of Ottawa,  was charged in Ottawa in the late 80s, got off, went to Ireland for a little R & R and promptly got caught at it over there and was convicted.)  It was after Mullins was released from an Irish jail some eighgt years later that I called the diocesan centre to find out where he would be serving now that he was out of jail.  I was essentially told to mind my own business – Father Mullins had a right to privacy!

I have no idea where Mullins went.  I was led to believe that he might be leaving the priesthood, but, it was a big secret.

Where is Father Michael Mullins now?  Did he leave the priesthood?  Was he shipped out of Canada to another diocese?  Wherever he may be, do those around him now know that he is a convicted sexual predator?

So, I am waiting!  And waiting!! For honesty and transparency.

****

There are too many articles to comment on in a catch up, but I will make brief comment on the following:

A. 19 March 2010:  Bishop says ‘no obligation’ to report sexual abuse  and other related articles

Quite unbelievable this one is.  A Danish bishop candidly stating that “in cases of sexual abuse, he has been advised by a lawyer that he is not obliged to immediately notify the authorities.”

And,  Bishop Gianfranco Girotti, regent of the Apostolic Penitentiary, claiming that a confessor should not be obliged to urge a molester-penitent to disclose his acts publicly or to a superior.

Two questions and/or comments:

(1) Who was the lawyer who advised the Danish bishop?  Is he a canon lawyer?  He should be properly identified so that he can either explain or defend himself.

(2) I do believe that a confessor is bound to withhold absolution if he believes true contrition is lacking.  And I do believe true contrition would be lacking if a clerical abuser refuses to have both police and the parents of his victim(s) notified.  Anything else is an easy out.  

How can a confessor give absolution to a clerical molester who refuses to be accountable for his sins and crimes?  And why would any confessor not urge a clerical molester penitent to hold himself fully accountable for his sins?  And why would a confessor not  withhold absolution until such time as the penitent takes the proper steps to be held accountable for his actions?

Finally, the confessor has the right and in this case I believe the duty  to ask such a penitent to discuss the matter outside the confessional and therefore free of the seal of confession.  If the penitent is seriously contrite I believe he will be anxious to make amends as best as he can and agree to do so.  The confessor is then free to go to the authorities and ensure that justice is done.

(B) 18 March 2010: View of Monsignor Dooley rejected and other related articles

There it is again.  From another corner of the world.  A canon lawyer.

Is this erroneous notion that clerical molesters are everyone else’s responsibility but the bishop’s the doing of canon lawyers?

 Which reminds me, how many known or suspect clerical sexual predators have been recycled through canon law studies?  Does anyone know?  I ‘m by no means saying that all canon lawyers fit into that category, and that there are good and decent canon lawyers, but I do know that a goodly number of sexual predators have been recycled through canon law studies.

Perhaps in the clean up it’s high time to do a purge of canon lawyers – laicize those who are known sexual predators and thoroughly investigate those who are suspect molesters.

© 19 March 2010:  Abuse scandal edges closer to Pope Benedict and other related articles

Was then Cardinal Archbishop Ratzinger told about the psychoanalyst’s report?  I am hard-pressed to believe he wasn’t, but, we’ll have to wait and see.  If in fact no one advised him, those responsible for failing to relay such damning information up the food chain should be fired.

(D) 18 March 2001: Brazilian priest allegedly taped having sex with teen and other related articles

Here’s proof positive that priests accused of sexual abuse should stand trial no matter their age.  Never mind the nonsense that elderly priests are too old to stand trial on charges of sexual abuse.

(E) 18 March 2010: Vienna Boys’ Choir Caught Up in Sex Abuse Scandal 

It’s everywhere.  Absolutely everywhere.  Even the Vienna Boy`s Choir. 

No surprise reaaly.  But, ….Those angelic voices.  Those angelic faces.

How many have been sexually abused?  

(F) 18 March 2010: Cardinal Brady must go and other related articles

And it just goes on and on and on.  But at least the rot is coming out.

How could Brady not know that it was wrong to ship that monstrous pervert elsewhere?  How could he not have known in his heart of hearts that it was wrong ?

A final thought here.  Those children were silenced.  So was David Silmser. 

(G) 17 March 2010: Priest charged with sexual abuse faints in court as new allegations arise and other related articles

It’s not in the articles, but, this priest is in fact the godfather of the little 8-year-old boy he started molesting five years ago . 

Think of it.  While he was in seminary studying for the priesthood Flores was busily molesting his own godson!  And, not only that, having some sort of sexual interaction with a 17-year-old fellow seminarian!

Flores was ordained all of a year ago. 

And then he was caught indulging his fantasies with pornography. 

Questions:

(1) Did anyone in the seminary know what was going on with this pathetic and perverted man?

(2) During his years in seminary did Flores ever confess that he was molesting his godson?  If yes, did his confessor urge him to take responsibility for perverted actions?  If not, why not?

(3)  Flores was obviously a “late” vocation.  Is this the best we can do?

(4) Who made arrangments to get Flores into the seminary?  Who opened the doors to get him into the U.S.?

(H) 16 March 2010: Vatican completes probe of Legionaries scandal

Finally! 

Questions:

(1) What will the recommendations entail? 

(2) What pray tell becomes an order whose founder was molesting boys and, as we more recently learn, bedding women, fathering children, and molesting his own son?  And, according to reports, Macial was preying on youth right after he started the Legionaires.

(3) Will those who turned a blind eye to the allegations against Maciel over the years be held accountable?

(I)  17 March 2010:  City makes bid for 1.7M

$8.7M! 

$8.7M for the Cornwall Police Service to malign and vilify Perry Dunlop, and paint victims as good-for-nothing liars, and protect it’s former Chief Claude Shaver.

Now perhaps people can understand why CPS did not, as it obviously should have, apply for funding at the start of the Cornwall Public Inquiry.  Had CPS applied for and received funding at the start it would have been sorley hobbled by inquiry caps.  There would have been no $8.7M flowing into a host of high-priced lawyers’ pockets, and hence no ability to chalk up countless hours poring through documents and parsing and twisting and spinning, and countless more hours prepping its own witnesses to take the stand.

 They did it.  They were able to have their cake and eat it too.

The reported legal tab for parties with standing at the inquiry was $21M.  That’s for how many parties?  (i) The Diocese, (ii) the Victims Group, (iii) Citizens for Community Renewal, (iv) Coalition for Action, (vi) Father Charles MacDonald, (vii) the estate of Ken Seguin, and (vii) Jacques Leduc.  I won’t tally them in because I’m not sure, but I believe it would also cover the legal costs of Jos van Deepen, and probably those of John MacDonald, David Silmser and Albert Roy.

So, eight parties plus probably a few others for a total of $21M.

And CPS chalks up $8.7M

Where’s the justice?

(J) 17 March 2010:  Taking the ‘next step’

Men and women are different.  The manner in which male victims of same-sex sexual abuse respond to sexual abuse is different than the manner in which females respond to sexual abuse inflcited by males.

It’s that simple. 

Let`s stop trying to fit these grown men into a mould tailor-made for females.

(K) 18 March 2010:  City taxpayers paying more

Interesting.  Do the extra costs incurred by CPS have anything to do with its hefty legal tabs?

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)
 

I have the problem sorted out :)  I am working at getting the blog posted and the links in now, but, it’s also supper time so will have to set it aside for a while - should have it taken care of in a couple of hours.

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca) 

 I am trying to post a blog - having great difficulty :(      For some reason my formatting will not stay.  I can’t post a long blog  with one sentence running into the next like this.  I will keep trying :)    Sylvia

Happy St. Patrick’s Day! 

A wee Irish blessing for the day:

May the Irish hills caress you.

May her lakes and rivers bless you.

May the luck of the Irish enfold you.

May the blessings of Saint Patrick behold you.

****

I have been posting a series of articles - intended to get a blog up yesterday too but just plain ran out of time.   So, for now, keep an eye on New to the Site on the Home page.  I will get a blog in today or tomorrow.

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

I took a sabbatical :)  For a number of reasons I felt the need and I just decided to take it :) 

I have posted several articles yesterday and today.  Check New to the Site on the Home page.

Note 10 March 2010:  35 charged in Ontario child porn bust.  Look at the ages of some of these boys!  I can not believe it.  Fifteen-year-old boys into kiddie porn!  Where did that come from?  I shudder to think.

Does anyone out there perchance know if the David Allan Glaude from Cornwall is related to Justice Normand Glaude?  Glaude, as we well know, has relatives in the Cornwall area so it is highly possible.

Also note that chaos is erupting in Europe - and no doubt the Vatican - as victims of clerical childhood sexual abuse at various schools in Germany and Holland finally come forward.  I won’t re-post the links here - all can be accessed on New to the Site. 

Also, for those who have been asking, note that I finally posted the articles I wrote back in 1993 on Father Ken Keeler.

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

Bishop Raymond Lahey has another court date today, Friday, 19 February 2010.  I had been thinking of going but decided against. 

I menetioned before that I arrived there last week and it was all wrapped up a few days earlier.  Well, here is what happened.  The court date had been set on Wednesday 03 February 2010 for 9 am 12 February 2010 in courtroom #8.  As I mentioned in that blog, the date had momentarily been set for 05 February 2010, and then there was some talk about the judge which was difficult to catch and then a rapid change to 12 February 2010 - all agreeing that their calendars were open for that date and time.

Something changed. 

On 05 February Lahey’s defence filed an application to change the date to 08 February 2010.   According to the Application,

“Application is made for the following exceptional circumstances:

“This matter was previously set for trial readiness court on Feb. 12, 2010 to be spoken to.  However, Counsel will be unavailable and wishes to bring the matter forward to be spoken to on February 8, 2010.”

I did sit in on proceedings in courtroom #8 last week.  It apparently is the courtroom which deals with issues related to trial readiness, i.e., one defence lawyer was asking for an extension because other charges had been brought forward against his client, others were seeking delays for whatever reason.  It seems to me it’s like remand court but a step closer trial?

No matter, I think anything of interest which had to be said in public would have been addressed on the 8th.  I missed it :(  What they’re up to tomorrow I have not the foggiest, but I don’t think I’ll be missing much - it’s like a sausage factory in there too :).

As it stands it would seem that things are stuttering along toward trial - no plea therefore seems it must be a ‘not guilty’?

Of interest, Lahey’s high profile lawyer Michael Edelson has now been retained by Colonel Russell Williams.  (Williams is in custody at the Quinte detention Centre.  That’s the same place they had poor Perry locked up for a spell- possibly even the same cell? )   

Edelson also briefly represented Jacques Leduc. 

And, of course, while all of this plays out, the sex abuse allegations against Roman Catholic priest and now retired Chaplain General of the Canadian Armed Forces chaplain Monsignor Roger Bazin loom large.

I said I would be getting more info here.  I have been doing a bit of digging around but have to delve into files related to the lawsuit launched against me by now deceased priest, Father Lorne Whalen.  Whalen had been a military chaplain for a spell - just before he surfaced in the sanctuary of my church.  Bazin was Chaplain General at the time.

The action against me was dropped after six long years.  

The action was also against the Ottawa Sun.  The Sun had been going to see the case to trial but, unfortunately, decided at the 11 th hour it would be cheaper to pay Whalen a few thousand dollars than go to trial.  Such a shame.

 Anyway, I have raft of files related to the lawsuit which I must go through now.  In light of the charges against Bazin I will most definitely share what may be of interest. 

****

Day 3 of Lent.  One bishop (Raymond Lahey) heading toward trial of kiddie porn charges, the former Chaplain General/Brigadier General (Roger Bazin) of the armed forces facing child sex abuse charges, and the Colonel of the Trenton, Ontario Air Force base (Russell Williams) facing charges of murder, sexual assault and who knows what.

God help us.

****

I have several emails to answer.  I will do so next week.  It’s been a bad week health-wise for my husband and self, plus boxes from finally Ireland arrived and I have been up to my ears unpacking and getting things squared away.  I’m still at it, but getting there.  This nearly brings to close the long painful journey which started last August.  It’s been a difficult time. 

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

I missed this in the paper yesterday - a good friend called and asked had I seen it.  No, I had not. 

I did a bit of googling and came up with a series of articles re sex abuse charges Monisgnor Roger Bazin, Roman Catholic priest, former military chaplain and former Brigadier-General in the Canadian Armed Forces.   As Brigadier General Bazin was the top dog in the military chaplaincy chain of command.

I knew him! 

I see that in the initial reports Bazin was denying, and then along comes word of a secret $24,000 2005 settlement against another “alleged” victim.  And I see that Bishop Fred Colli claims he knew nothing of the 2005 allegations!!  That’s a hard one to swallow, but, we shall see…

This makes me sick, but I am thankful the dirt is coming out into the open. 

There are a couple of things I must check on this - will be back with more

Enough for now

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

A busy couple of days.  Settling business following my brother’s death is still wrapping up – a shipment which I packed and sent while in Ireland has finally arrived – running around today picking up papers and clearing customs.  It’s done, and boxes will be delivered tomorrow .  I managed to arrange delivery to allow time to pop into courtroom #8 at 9 am this morning to find out what’s happening with the charges against disgraced Bishop Raymond Lahey.

****

I said I would double check on the Emma Wilson-King business to be sure I have my facts straight.  Yes indeed.  Two paedophiles are on the loose in Cornwall, their identities secret because they were charged and tried as juveniles.  This because Wilson –King concluded the the acts of sexual abuse (sodomy included ++) were committed when the molesters were  juveniles.  Neither did jail time for their crimes.  Few know their identities. The sexual abuse began when the victim was a 7-year-old child.

According to the victim there is no doubt that both these men were molesting him when they were over age 18.  According to the victim the facts regarding time lines and dates re his first molester were irrefutable.  He actually got into an argument with Wilson-King when he found out that  the man would be tried in juvenile court, and bluntly told Wilson-King in so many words that he was the one who was sodomized and he remembers.  At that Wilson-King allegedly broke into tears and away she went, and in short order the victim was chastised by another police officer for giving “Emma a hard time.” 

A probation officer called the victim to say he was going over the file of one of the molesters – he told the victim that the perp should have been charged as an adult  - he allegedly said that the numbers were all there right in front of him.

But, the charges stood.  Both men were tried as juveniles.  Both were found guilty.  Neither went to jail for these atrocities.  Because they were tried as juveniles both are now protected by a publication ban.    One got 3 months house arrest and 9 months probation.  The other got three years probation and was deemed a high risk to re-offend.

By the sound of it, another of CPS’ thoroughly bungled child sex abuse “investigations.”

So, there it is, two convicted molesters are on the loose in Cornwall.  Few know who they are.  Children are at risk.

Sad to say, that’s the other thing I remembered about Emma Wilson-King.  I double checked. 

Still not a word about the charges or court appearance.  Silence! 

****

A letter to the Editor and two new articles posted.

10 February 2010:  Letter to Editor

06 February 2010: Retreats for sex abuse victims

11 February 2010:  Taking steps to healing 

When I first read the article about the retreats in Quinte I wondered how that came about and who, if anyone, was the Cornwall contact.  It seemed to come out of nowhere.  Yesterday I saw that the connection is Justice Normand Glaude himself, and also may well be Janet Handy, a former member of Glaude’s presumably conflict-free  Advisory Panel. 

Has Handy nestled right into Cornwall?  Has she actually relocated to Cornwall permanently?  When she was first introduced at the Inquiry she was from Toronto and had been heavily involved as Executive Director of Gatehouse there. (scroll down the Advisory Panel page to see article re financial problems at Gatehouse in 1997. )

But, here she is, running a women’s group called SASS, and now piggy-backing piggy-backing healing sessions for male victims courtesy of funding from the AG.

Is this a perc which comes with having been on Glaude’s Advisory Panel?  Was it all hammered out in advance?  Or, did the powers that be just see something in Handy that no one else had?  I don’t know, but I must say I don’t think it’s appropriate that those who ‘worked’ the inquiry as advisors should be the beneficiaries of the government handouts they advoctaed.  Seems when it comes to the inquiry and things Cornwall we just move along from one real or perceived conflcit of interest to another 

That aside, what an insult to male victims.  Did you read that?  They’re going to make “ a dream catcher”  or, perhaps, “ a rattle”!!! 

What absolute nonsense!  These are grown men. 

On top of that, these men are being relegated to the back door!  To make the women feel comfortable?!  

I don’t believe it. 

What about the men?  Will they feel comfortable being relegated to the back door?  Or, does that matter?

Note that counselor Seguin says that everyone is equal?!  But, front door for the ladies and back door for the men it is – because Heaven forbid we upset the ladies who, after all, were here first?

Why do I fear this is no more than a feminist sorti into the potentially lucrative domain of “healing” for male victims of childhood sexual abuse.  

One more and final comment on this silliness …

According to the article, Handy’s Halifax-based helper Wanda Seguin said” “We’re giving back to the community. If we all did that, all of our little ones would be safe. Wouldn’t that be amazing?”

What does Seguin mean?  How would “all of our little ones be safe?”   Does she really mean that if everyone took part in healing sessions, and making rattles, and eating our children would be safe? 

How? 

Why?

If the paedophiles and molesters  are still running loose – and of course we know only too well that they are! - how will making rattles etc protect our children?

I don’t understand this at all.  Does Seguin perhaps mean that all male victims are molesters, and that if they make rattles etc they will stop molesting?  Is that it? 

I hope not.  I certainly hope not.  That may be fine and dandy for the few who actually do become molesters, but what does it say of and do to the many who don’t? 

If perchance that’s what’s behind those comments it’s nothing short of negative and malicious stereotyping of male victims of same-sex childhood sexual abuse.   As I say, I do hope that’s not what is meant, but, back to my question:  how in the name of goodness are these weird new “healing” sessions for male victims going to protect our children? 

As far as I’m concerned, the bottom line is this:  our little ones will not be safe until the judiciary, legal profession, and law enforcement treat child sexual abuse as the abhorrent crime and sin that it is, and until molesters are treated like the abhorrent human beings that they are and are locked up, - for a good long time.

And, alas, in this day and age and as things stand, that really would be amazing.  But, a goal well worth fighting for.  True justice.  Somehow I sense that that would go a long way to helping victims “heal” - just the sheer assurance that society and “the system” views the sexual abuse of a child as so dispicable that the hand of justice will fall heavy and hard on those who dare to sexually violate a child. 

Enough for now,

Sylvia
(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

A new article posted.   Cornwall Police Service Detective Constable Emma Wilson-King ‘allegedly’ drinking and driving

09 February 2010: City police officer charged by OPP with impaired driving

Wilson-King’s name has surfaced several times in relation to various CPS sex abuse “investigations.”  Perhaps the most familiar to me is the time that Wilson-King, apparently at the behest of Father Kevin Maloney and his lawyer Sean Adams, ordered John MacDonald, a man alleging sexual abuse by a diocesan priest, not to call Father Maloney, a Roman Catholic priest.  The whole thing was a royal convoluted mess. 

Less familiar is the role Wilson-King played in the investigation of a victim whose name is under publication ban, as it that of his convicted molester whose name is also under publication ban and who is now freely roaming the streets.  I will say no more on this until I double check my facts.

No matter, the bottom line is that one of CPS’ own has been charged with drunken driving. 

To say the least, the circumstances surrounding this are a little odd.  Seems it was a male passenger in the vehicle who actually flagged down the OPP! 

Why was the man, whoever he was, not behind the wheel?  Was he too intoxicated himself to drive? but not too intoxiacted to flag down police?  or what?

And why was the car stopped at the side of the road, presumably with Wilson-King still behind the wheel?

Bizarre.  There truly must be more to this latest CPS saga than meets the eye

Incidentally, I just checked for a report of Wilson-King’s court appearance which, according to media reports, was scheduled for yesterday.  Nothing.

Does anyone have an update?  Did she appear?  What’s going on?

And speaking of John MacDonald, not a boo as yet about the RCMP investigation into his complaints against the former Cornwall Crown and two former Crowns turned judges - Murray MacDonald, Robert Pelletier and Peter Griffiths.

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

Just in case people miss the blog re ex priest Donald Grecco posted today on the Why Four years? …

With no word re Grecco’s latest court appearance I called the Cayuga courthouse today to check the outcome of the scheduled 03 February 2010 court date.  I was told that the case has been transferred to the Hamilton courthouse “for a guilty plea.”  It is unknown what Grecco intends to plea guilty to.

Grecco’s next court date is 26 March 2010 at the Hamilton Courthouse, courtroom #302.  I don’t have the time – didn’t think of asking at the time L(  If someone out there knows the time could you please blog under Why four years? 

****

While at the Ottawa courthouse for the Lahey shenanigansI decided to take the opportunity to check some paperwork, specifically lawsuits against Jacques Leduc.  Two have been filed at the Ottawa courthouse  – I checked one file (it costs money to get the files so I just pick away with a file here and file there)

The case file that I checked is still open.   I understand from the staff that there is a settlement conference coming up in March 2010.

This has been going on since 2005!!!!

There is one particular thing of interest in the Amended Statement of Claim I want to pass along.  (From what I can see the Amended Statement of Claim was amended solely because of a typo in the original Statement of Claim.  The original statement read “…the defendant MacDonald used his position of authority and trust…”  The amended statement reads “the defendant Leduc used his position of authority and trust..,:

Para 8 of the amended statement reads in part:

Commencing in the year 1989, when the Plaintiff , was 15 years old and for the following 4 years, Leduc repeatedly sexually abused, assaulted and molested the Plaintiff, exposed him to prurient sexual behaviour, encouraged him to engage in deviant and prurient sexual behaviour with himself and others.  The particulars of the same are as follows:

(g) anally penetrating and sodomizing the Plaintiff;

(j) exposing the Plaintiff to group sexual activity;

Group sexual activity!

That I had never heard. 

This “alleged” victim never had a chance to take the stand to testify at what was passed off as the sex abuse trial of Jacques Leduc.  I can’t help but wonder now how much of the vilifying and back stabbing which went on inside and outside of the courtroom was to ensure that this “alleged” victim would never make it to the stand to testify. 

Rather damning I’d say.  Of course, as we all know, these allegations have not been proven in a court of law.  And, as we all also know, Leduc could have seen his trial through to the bitter end – he could have thumbed his nose at the chance to “walk” on a technicality, and he could have fought these allegations out in a court of law.  Leduc  opted to for the technicality, the one which rested on vilifying Perry Dunlop and stabbing Shelley Hallett in the back.

His choice.  No matter, these allegations have not been proven in a court of law, and, in his Statement of Defence, Leduc denies them.

Also of interest, in his Statement of Defence Leduc claims that he has been targeted and charged because of his involvement in the David Silmser case:

25. In 1998, Leduc was charged with various offences as a result of an ongoing investigation referred to as “Project Truth.”  This investigation carried on by a special task force created by the Ontario Provincial Police proceeded to an investigation arising from allegations of the existence of a pedophile ring in or around the City of Cornwall whereby various high profile, professional men, including clergy, lawyers, judicial officers, crown attorneys, probation officers and others in positions of authority were involved in child molestation activity.

26. These allegations, as referred to in the previous paragraph, were initiated by individuals who were concerned about the settlement of a potential civil suit against the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall by a person alleging sexual misconduct of one of its priests.  Leduc represented the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall in this settlement and the matter gained much notoriety and publicity in 1992 and 1993.

27. It has now come to light that as a result of his participation in this settlement of the civil suit Leduc was a person of interest to those who alleged the existence of the pedophile ring and was targeted as a sexual predator, which led the police to carry on an investigation in his [sic] respect.”
  
How terribly pathetic.  But, really the same old same same old.  Leduc claims he was charged with sexual abuse because of his involvement with the David Silmser pay-off!   That means that he claims the very OPP officers who helped him stab Shelley Hallet squarely between the shoulder blades to get his first stay are the ones who had him charged in the first place!  Does that make one iota of sense? 

Note there is not a boo about the illegal dimension to the “settlement”/ pay-off he was party to. 

Note too that in para 26.  he says “were initiated by individuals who were concerned about the settlement of a potential civil suit” against the diocese.

 A potential suit.  Interesting choice of words here.  A little more accurate than the standard buzz that the $32,000 was a settlement for legal action commenced by David Silmser, but ….still a considerable distance from the truth that the $32,000 was in fact an illegal pay-off to gag Silmser and keep him from having Father Charlie charged.

Anyway, I do wish both Leduc and Charlie had had the courage of their convictions to see their sex abuse trials through to the end so that at the end of the day they could either be found guilty or be in a position to honestly say that the allegations against them were not proven in a  court of law. 

They didn’t.  Both bolted for the Charter. 

I repeat, the allegations against Leduc noted above have not been proven in a court of law.

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@the inquiry.ca)