The subpoena buzz makes not an iota of sense

Share Button

The information on Father Rene Dubé is posted.  As noted, Dubé  was acquitted in a Montreal court largely because police botched identification, assuming initially, without showing him pictures of diocesan clergy, that Dube’s alleged victim was describing Father Gilles Deslaurier.

I mentioned yesterday that subpoenas are in the offing for some of Father Charles MacDonald’s alleged victims.  These men are not part of the Victims Group and have not been involved in the proceedings to date.  Where this will go I haven’t the faintest, nor do I have the faintest why more of Charlie’s alleged victims are being rounded up at precisely the same time as Charlie prepares to launch an appeal of the Ontario Divisional court ruling that victims can testify, albeit, as I always add, in a limited fashion. If the appeal proceeds it will be an eternity before any of his alleged victims get near the stand.

So why the sudden drive to drag these fellows into the fray and start feeding them into the wringer right now?  Why not wait?   

Perhaps the whole thing is sheer optics?  Given the state of chaos which prevails with this ruse of an inquiry it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.  Justice Glaude just may have decided it would be good optics and good PR to round up Charlie’s alleged victims.  I certainly hope that’s not the case.

Or, as I mused yesterday, perhaps there’s been a little deal-making going on behind closed doors?

Whatever.  As far as I’m concerned the bottom line is that this subpoena buzz makes not an iota of sense, not after months upon months of dilly-dallying around, and not after assurances that is totally inconsequential whether or not the sexual abuse allegations against Charlie are true, and not after more assurances that no ill (i.e., charges) will befall Charlie as a result of this inquiry, and not after Justice Glaude decided upon his arrival that the “rumour” and “innuendo” swirling around Cornwall are false and Charlie happens to be very much a part of that so-called rumour and innuendo.

In short, the subpoena buzz regarding more of Charlie’s alleged victims makes not an iota of sense with this mandate and this commissioner and at this point in time.

What’s it all about?  We’ll just have to wait and see…

Meanwhile I continue to wonder if the inquiry investigative team have a duty to report sexual abuse allegations against men who are very much alive and well with continued access to children?  They should, shouldn’t they?  Have they?

Enough for now,

Sylvia
(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *