Project O. Bookmark is off the ground!
Hallelujah!!!!
Last evening (Tuesday 07 April 2009) John MacDonald met with two RCMP officers. The investigation into his two-year-old complaint with the Cornwall Police Service is up and running. It is code named Project O. Bookmark, the “O” I believe being “O Division,” as in Ontario Division of the RCMP.
Why Bookmark I have no idea.
The two RCMP officers are
Sgt. Glenn Trendell (Proceeds of Crime Unit, Kingston, Ontario)
Sgt. M.O.M. Paul S. Thompson (Commercial Crimes Section, Kitchener, Ontario)
According to John the pair have been working on the investigation for about two-and-a-half weeks. They were called in to do the job by D/C Danny Aikman.
I understand that Thompson will be back and forth to Kitchener and is currently returning home until end May to carry on with other business. Trendell will carry on with the investigation. I understand that although he will busy with other things Thompson will be able to find time to do some necessary reading. There is certainly no lack of reading material when it comes Cornwall 
.
I also understand that the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General`s office has been notified that the investigation is under way.
John is relieved and, I would say, cautiously optimistic. The two year wait has come to an end. He was pleased with the meeting. Things are finally moving.
Call me a fool but I must say I am surprised to find myself quite hopeful. Barring former Chief Claude Shaver and John Spice (the Cornwall Public Inquiry lead investigator) who are both ex RCMP the RCMP is an unknown entity in the Cornwall scandal, i.e. I am unable to say the RCMP pooched this, or covered up that because, to my knowledge, they have never been involved. So, for now at least I am content to give them the benefit of the doubt and trust that they will do what good officers should do to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation.
As always, we shall see….
******
Does anyone have any news on the recent Don Greccocourt appearance? OIf yes, please pass it along. We are anxiously waiting for an update.
*****
I’m still plugging away – going through transcripts. I keep vowing “that’s it” and then come across something that I absolutely have to check out – and away I go again. It is amazing to see the bee hive of activity that was unleashed after Perry passed David Silmser’s victim statement over to the CAS. Amazing. I am looking forward to eventually getting that detailed timeline hobbled together to see just who was tripping over who and where.
What I happened on today by chance was David Silmser’s testimony in which he said he had gone to the Children’s Aid Society before Perry ever went. Dave has consistently maintained that he went to CAS before Perry ever went. Those who followed the inquiry will recall that Geraldine Fitpatrick’s testimony corroborated that.
Fitzpatrick’s explosive testimony seems to have gone by the bye and been dismissed as irrelevant. But, she doesn’t know David Silmser from a hole in the wall and comes up with testimony that puts Dave going to CAS before Perry? I think that’s rather significant.
During his 16 January 2007 John MacDonald’s also testified that Dave had told him he, Dave, had gone to CAS before Perry. In fact John had a note to that effect from 25 March 1996 which he took with him when he, John, went to see Rick Abell. I won’t go further on that because there is John’s testimony about Abell writing something on a piece of paper, and Dave has given testimony about the same meeting where he said Abell slipping a piece of paper under the door. It’s a bit confusing - I want to see if there’s any other testimony related to that incident..
The obvious question though is is it possible that Dave is confused with his time frames? I suppose it’s possible, but he is just so adamant on this. .
Another example…
On 14 August 1996 Carson Chisholm put some questions to Dave to clarify some issues, and Dave came out with the six month time frame again – in this instance he said he went to CAS six months before the media leak.
Anyway, below is Dave insisting in his 09 September 1997 testimony at Charlie’s preliminary hearings that they have their dates wrong. It’s a little confusing too but I think one can get the gist of it. All this came inot evidence as John Callaghan (CPS) played the Let’s Pretend David Silmser is on the Stand game (19 April 2007). It started with Callaghan stating the following:
The last area I would have touched upon is, I would have touched upon the evidence, you know, recall when I examined Mr. John MacDonald. There was a note of Mr. John MacDonald’s wherein he had indicated in the note that David Silmser had advised him that he had told, or that he had reported, the abuse of Father MacDonald to the Children’s Aid Society six months before Constable Dunlop, and I would have reviewed that in light of the comments in the transcript of January 30th.
Callaghan then proceeded to read the questions put to Dave and Dave’s answers from the transcript of R. vs Charles MacDonald – September 9, 1997. Callaghan did not identify but I would imagine the questions were posed by Michael Neville, Charlie’s lawyer, Callaghan picked it up at this point:
Question: “Do you remember when that interview was?
Answer: — and they’re talking about the interview with Mr. Bell and Ms. DeBellis.
Answer: “Not exactly, no.”
Question: “If I suggest to you it was the 2nd of November ’93 would you agree with that, accept that?
Answer: “No, I wouldn’t.”
Question: “Okay. Well, I’m taking it off the transcript. It’s dated.”
Answer: “But there’s a problem there.”
Question: “What’s that?”
Answer: “What I feel the Children’s Aid Society have, have changed dates in order to protect Perry Dunlop on something. I think I seen him a lot. A lot. It was before that date they were written down. I think the Children’s Aid they are involved in this cover-up in Cornwall.”
Question: “Okay.”
Answer: “So I wouldn’t stand by any of those dates. I wouldn’t stand by any of that
Question: “Okay. They’re part of a cover-up?”
Answer: “I believe so.”
Question: “And they’re involved in a cover-up with whom, with Mr. Dunlop?”
Answer: “No, no. I think they’ve covered up some dates so they wouldn’t — they covered up dates because what happened there was I went to see the Children