Judges and Crown accused of obstructing justice

Share Button

Two Ontario judges and a Cornwall Crown attorney have been formally accused of obstructing justice.

All three, Robert Pelletier, Peter Griffiths and Murray MacDonald, were at one time Crown attorneys involved in the prosecution, or, as in the case of Murray MacDonald, non prosecution, of Father Charles MacDonald. Pelletier and Griffiths are now judges. Murray MacDonald continues as Crown attorney in Cornwall, a position he held in 1992 when David Silmser first told Cornwall police he had been sexually abused by Father Charles MacDonald and probation officer Ken Seguin.

The allegations of obstruction of justice stem largely from the contents of a 02 April 1997 memo sent from Robert Pelletier to Peter Griffiths. Both were Crowns at the time. Griffiths was Pelletier’s immediate superior.

In the memo, which was entered into evidence during the testimony of John MacDonald, Pelletier indicates that he is in quandary as to whether or not to lay further charges against Father MacDonald on behalf of two new complainants, and that it is in that capacity that “my personal as well as professional affiliations with Murray MacDonald become a complicating factor.”

When, at a later date, I post the memo and a related in-depth article you will see that Pelletier’s affiliations with Murray MacDonald are a “complicating factor” precisely because they place him, Pelleter, in a conflict of interest. He is in a conflict of interest situation and he knows it.

In short then the memo shows that both Pelletier and Griffiths were aware that

(1) Pelletier was in a conflict of interest situation and did nothing about it for nearly two-and-a-half years, and

(2) Murray MacDonald was in serious undeclared conflict of interest while the Silmser allegations were being investigated. The undeclared conflict was Murray MacDonald’s personal contacts with, to name but a few, Ken Seguin, the Chief of police, Father Charles MacDonald, the bishop of the day (Eugene Larocque) and, Murray’s uncle Malcolm MacDonald who was Father MacDonald’s lawyer.

That then is a brief synopsis of the memo which triggered the accusation that Pelletier, Griffiths and Murray MacDonald obstructed justice.

John MacDonald is the complainant.

John, an “alleged” victim of Father Charles MacDonald, states that he attended the Cornwall Police station on Saturday 20 January 2007. He states that he told Mr. Nelson Ayotte, a member of the Cornwall police, that he wanted the trio charged with obstruction of justice.

My attempts yesterday to confirm that the allegations were received by police and the current status of the complaint came to naught. Nelson Ayotte was not available. Angela, a dispatcher, cited privacy policies and stated that the force could not confirm that a complaint was lodged. As I understood her response, only the complainant can attain such confirmation. Furthermore, it seems that all charges are not routinely made public. If and when police lay charges the charges maymay – be made public. I am surprised.

Anyway, between now and then, where this all goes remains to be seen. Indeed, the allegations open up a hornet’s nest, particularly given that

(1) the Cornwall police force, the office of the Attorney General and the OPP are already heavily implicated in the Cornwall scandal and are seen by many as party to a cover-up;

(2) all Crown attorneys are employees of the Attorney General; and

(3) these allegations of obstruction of justice go to the heart of the allegations of cover-up.

Just try to think it through. For example:

(1) Which, if any, Ontario police force is capable of conducting a truly impartial investigation into these allegations against two judges and a Crown attorney?

(2) Is there a Crown attorney employed by Attorney General Bryant who is impartial and could be perceived as impartial and therefore in a position to advise police on the merits of laying charges against Pelletier, Griffiths and/or Murray MacDonald?

(3) If charges are laid is there a Crown attorney working for the Attorney General who could prosecute the case without hint of interference from fellow Crowns or the AG? and in such a fashion that not only would justice be done, it would also and equally importantly seen to be done?

(4) Is there a judge anywhere in Ontario who could take the bench at an obstruction of justice trial for any or all of the trio who could be remotely perceived as impartial and independent? and, finally

(5) All those who deny a cover-up and dismiss the allegations of a paedophile ring and cover-up as no more than “rumour” and “innuendo” have an obvious and vested interest in ensuring that none of the accused trio are charged.

Sadly, justice in and for Cornwall – as it relates to the Cornwall sex abuse scandal – can no longer be sought or wrought through Ontario Crowns and judges. Too may are compromised, too many are in conflict and too many are seen as part of the problem.

What a horrific sordid mess.

And so, how John’s complaint is handled and by whom remains to be seen. I believe however that it goes without saying that it must be handled, …..and it must be handled properly. Justice must be done .

One final but very important note on this: Good for you John 🙂 That took courage and stamina. Well done!


In light of this turn of events I will, as mentioned earlier, turn my energies to completing my research and wrapping up the article I have been working on related to the Pelletier memo. I believe the timelines and other bits and pieces of information I have already compiled will help put what’s happening here into perspective.

I will also post the memo itself – redacted as required – and inject my comments to clarify some statements which seem to misrepresent some facts.


Hearings resume at 2 pm on Monday 29 January 2007 with comments from Justice Glaude about where we’ve been and where we’re going 🙂

I believe David Silmser is scheduled to take the stand on Tuesday, 30 January 2007.

And that’s enough for now,


This entry was posted in Accused or charged, Canada, Clerical sexual predators, Cornwall, John MacDonald, Ken Seguin, Scandal, Silmser and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Judges and Crown accused of obstructing justice

  1. Jerry Craig says:

    Its amazing what Judges get away with I was 16 living in Wilf and Alice Mayer foster home. I was beat there from things like feeling sorry for others getting punished, or being slapped and getting mad (kicker was anytime that happened i was scared to death mad never a cured to be mad) by sixteen i was promoted to beating kids. for another two years. when i ran away i ran away . Feb 17 1981 naive to the fact i could walk out the door with out pearl or i thought when i had secured a place to live and a school to go to finish my grade 12……since i was miles away I felt guilty that as warped as it was i phoned my foster mom told her not to worry…what a mistake the following day at school i got called down to the office my foster dad and a parent of one of the other kids were there saying i was wanted for a crime and they took me against my will Kidnapped if you want to fit those action in the Martin criminal Code. it was reported to the rcmp some time latter you see i could put the beatings behind me but Sandy a grade two was showing up at Seven person school with marks bruises . so they changed her punishment he whole free time was filled with Lines and push ups 500 you see at three hundred she would faulter if i never made her finish i would have to do them… Looking back i was a coward and it weighed heavy on my conscious you see Wilf Mayer found some scrap rubber hose and from 400 push ups the only way to make her finish was with constant beating that little girl with that hose. When i finally made an appointment with the then crown prosecutor Darwin Greaves of Medicine Hat his word were the only way to chsrge the foster home was to charge me.. I said if thats what it takes then go ahead…but they did not…for some reason they would not be charged….you see my mom was retarded caused by a blow to her head my father I would nt find out to a latter date and it turned out the foster home knew it and they used it like a get out of Jail card I know it sounds preposterous but some how knowing who my dad was was the key to understanding it there is not enough space here to tell the whole story but the ramification have hunted me till this day why and what did this foster home have on the system and who in the system had that kinda juice….the rean was who was my father(Harry Veiner was my dad) and being Jewish he had two daughter but a male would collect most of the will something those daughter did not want exposed they were ritch but still they couldnot control the Justice system except Natalie Veiner was married to Jack Austin at the time he was leader of the senate an uncountable office of our government. When i got blackballed from the rigs he was minister of exploration and when he was having dads will thrown out he was the honorable Jack Austin qc and the will he threw out was written on my moms Birth date in 1980 i was 17 and the will mention a minor and appointed that payment for costs of said child shall be paid to a parent or guardian and that the reason Mayer foster home was above the law they were proof that everyone including Jack Austin knew, having that will thrown out when he new Harry’s son was me but instead convinced a court of queen bench to throw it out stating it was the senile wishes of a crazy old man in Facebook under jerry veiner i have it figure out on paper with proof and docs but no judge would hear any of it

Leave a Reply

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