Yes, it’s a sexual assault charge

Some more information regarding the recently arrested Father Denis Vaillancourt:

(1)  The Stormont Dundas and Glengarry OPP (Ontario Provincial Police) has now put out a statement regarding the arrest of Father Denis Vallaincourt:

Stormont Dundas and Glengarry Sexual Assault Investigations

The ‘incident’ was, as most have suspected, that of sexual assault..  Note that the assault transpired at a home in South Glengarry Township.  According to the statement, an OPP investigation indicated that:   “….an adult male had been sexually assaulted by the accused male.”

I mentioned earlier it truly is hard to tell what is meant by “adult male.”  Some would use the term to refer to any male over the age of consent (16, for most sexual offences).  For what it ‘s worth, we truly can not tell from the statement therefore if the complainant is a teenage male over the age of 16, or a male over the age of 20.

Note too that Father Vaillancourt’s next court date is 18 November 2015.  I don’t know the time yet.  In fact, I called the Alexandria courthouse this morning to get the next court date only to discover that at that time there was no record on the books of the charge.  I decided that I would call later in the week and try again.  I will still do that, but this time I will do so to find out the court time on the 18th.

the Cornwall Standard Freeholder reported the sexual assault charge this morning:

03 November 2015:  Retired Alexandria-Cornwall priest Denis Vaillancourt’s charge: sexual assault

(2)  Two pictures from the 1967 Horizon have been posted (Horizon was the Cornwall Classical College yearbook).  One you will see at the top of the Father Denis Vaillancourt page.  The other can be viewed by clicking on the following link:

1967:  Denis Vaillancourt receives award at Cornwall Classical College (1967 Horizon) 

I believe that Denis Vaillancourt would have been about 22-years-of-age in those pictures.  The Classical  College was affiliated  with Ottawa University and provided courses leading to a BA).  That same year Jacques Leduc was in Grade 11.

(3)  If you scroll down the Father Denis Vaillancourt page you will see that for a  number of of years he was a member of the Tribunal.  I can only post the information which I have on hand, but my guess is that he was serving on the tribunal  shortly before he – along with Jacques Leduc – attained his canon law credentials at Ottawa’s Saint Paul University until the past few years.

Jacques Leduc, as you can see, was also a member of the tribunal for a number of those years.  Many already know that Leduc was not a priest, but rather a married layman and lawyer whom Bishop Eugene Larocque deemed, for reasons unknown, qualified to serve on the tribunal.

What I want to point out here is that also on the tribunal for a goodly number of those years was a Father Bernard Guindon.

Those familiar with the Cornwall sex abuse scandal and cover-up may recall that when David Silmser first contacted the Alexandria-Cornwall Diocese ‘alleging’ sexual abuse by Father Charles MacDonald he spoke to a Father Guindon.

Yes, that is the same Father Guindon who served on the marriage tribunal for many years with both Father Vaillancourt and Leduc.

So how did Guindon deal with David Silmser?

Guindon’s response was to brush Silmser off,  advising that since he, Silmser, no longer lived in the area but had moved to the Ottawa area he should contact the Archdiocese of Ottawa.  To add insult to injury, Father Guindon also asked: “What do you expect me to do”

Silmser then contacted Monsignor Schonenebach in Ottawa who redirected everything back to Cornwall , where of course it rightly belonged.

Can you believe it?

I can not conceive how he , a priest heavily involved with canon law, could not know that the complaints against Father Charles MacDonald belonged to the Alexandria-Cornwall Diocese.  Nor can I conceive how in good conscience he sent Dave packing!

My recollection is that  even after he pulled that Pontius Pilate washing of the hands with Dave Silmser he was  involved in Silmser’s complaints against Father Charles at a later date.

Further to all this, according to Monsignor Schonenbach, it was either Father Guindon or Monsignor Msgr. Donald McDougald,- he can’t remember which –  who told him that Dave’s allegations against Charlie couldn’t possibly be true because Father Charles MacDonald was such a wonderful priest

What a filthy dirty rotten mess!!!!

(4)   A question:  Why did Bishop Eugene Larocque ship both Father Vaillancourt and lawyer Jacques Leduc off to become canon lawyers?

And another:  What qualities did he see in the pair which he deemed made them worthy of such service to his diocese?

Enough for now,

Sylvia