Canada Day celebrations and the long weekend are behind us. The Cornwall Public Inquiry is on summer break until 14 August 2007. And I’ll carry on….
I have lots of catching up to do on testimony and a lot of fixing up to do on the website. I’ll take advantage of the weeks ahead to pick away at it all and also to slow down a little to smell the flowers, enjoy the sunshine, take a bit of vacation and get my house in order 🙂 Aside from vacation time in early August I will continue to blog as I wade through transcripts and add new material to the site.
For today there’s something very important I want to draw to you attention in Justice Glaude’s 29 June 2007 Statement, specifically “notices of misconduct.”
I do believe that Ron Leroux, through his mysterious recantations and inferences that Perry Dunlop fabricated huge chunks of Ron’s statements/affidavits, has handed Justice Normand Glaude and his counsel all they needed to issue notices of misconduct to a number of persons.
I want to make a couple of comments on that and raise a few questions, but first I’ll quote from Glaude’s statement and the referenced section 5 (2) of the Public Inquiries Act.
Justice Glaude’s 29 June 2007 statement:
AS IS THE CASE WITH ALL INQUIRIES, THIS INQUIRY MAY ISSUE CONFIDENTIAL SECTION 5(2) NOTICES UNDER THE PUBLIC INQUIRIES ACT. A SECTION 5(2) NOTICE IS A NOTICE OF MISCONDUCT THAT CAN BE ISSUED TO AN INDIVIDUAL OR TO AN INSTITUTION OR ORGANIZATION. NOTICES CAN BE ISSUED AND
AMENDED OVER THE LIFETIME OF THE INQUIRY, AS LONG AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD IS PROVIDED TO THE INDIVIDUAL, INSTITUTION OR ORGANIZATION RECEIVING THE NOTICE.
The Public Inquiries Act:
Section 5 (2) of The Public Inquiries Act reads:
5. (2) No finding of misconduct on the part of any person shall be made against the person in any report of a commission after an inquiry unless that person had reasonable notice of the substance of the alleged misconduct and was allowed full opportunity during the inquiry to be heard in person or by counsel. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.41, s. 5 (2).
The inquiry which wasn’t going to force anyone to do anything and presumably had nothing to do with Project Truth is about to switch horses in midstream – again. Pressure will now be exerted to force Perry Dunlop onto the stand to testify at an inquiry with a flawed mandate commissioned by an institution heavily implicated in allegations of a ring and cover-up and before a judge engulfed in red flags who long ago and behind closed doors decided that the “rumour” and “innuendo” swirling around Cornwall on his arrival are false (and that was well before a single victim/ “alleged” victim took the stand to testify and, I have reason to believe, well before Ron Leroux had decided to recant).
Anyway, as I understand it Ron Leroux’ muddled testimony is the icing on the cake – Ron has given the commission all the fodder it needed, and I would say wanted, to issue notices of misconduct to a number of persons. He has essentially testified that large and significant portions of his signed statements and affidavits are lies which were added to his allegations by Perry Dunlop and/or Perry’s lawyer of the day, Charles Bourgeois. I believe it goes without saying that on the heel’s of Ron’s revised ‘story’ and the upcoming testimony of C-8 Perry will be issued a notice of misconduct which presumably would give him opportunity to defend himself. (C-8, who eluded charges of sexual abuse himself some years ago, also, according to the powers that be, turned tables on Perry by claiming that Perry told him to lie.)
I believe it goes without saying that Perry is at the top of the short list and will be issued a notice of misconduct. Whether or not that would lure the ‘legally’ battered, brusied and bleeding ‘whistleblower’ into the Weave Shed/coliseum I have no idea. But, I do believe that’s the plan. Get him into the coliseum for the grand, pre-ordained and public shoot- the-messenger finale. No ring. No cover-up.
I also believe Charles Bourgeois is on the short list. I am inclined to think too that it is highly probable that Perry’s wife Helen and brother-in-law Carson Chishom are high on the list, the commission ‘theory’ no doubt being that all were party to Perry’s “conspiracy” to falsely, and just for the fun of it and for lack of anything better to do with his life and time and career and reputation, accuse prominent men in the community of horrendous illegal acts, sexual and/or other.
(1) Once again I must ask: what and/or who prompted Ron Leroux to recant large and significant portions of his previously consistent allegations?
(2) When precisely did Ron first declare he was going to recant? and to whom?
(3) Will anyone demand the disclosure of all inquiry/Ron Leroux notes and tapings?
(3) Will Ron Leroux be charged with perjury for repeating allegations to police officers which he now says are lies? and if not, why not?
(4) Does anyone think justice, truth and/or Perry Dunlop stands a chance at this presumably non-Project Truth “inquiry” which remains under the firm thumb and control of an institution heavily implicated in the Cornwall sex abuse scandal and cover-up, namely the office of the Attorney General?
(5) Is this “inquiry” encouraging or discouraging police officers and/or other citizens to blow the whistle when it should be blown??
(6) Is this inquiry encouraging or discouraging disclosure from men who have been reluctant to come forward with their allegations that they endured childhood sexual abuse at the hands of men who were/are pillars of the community?
(7) Is this “inquiry” advancing or hindering the interests of paedophiles in general and men who prey on boys in particular?
(8) Why was Steve Parisien not issued a notice of misconduct and given opportunity to defend himself in the Weave Shed against allegations which arose in the Weave Shed? What I mean is, in Steve’s instance why did Glaude break with inquiry policy, publicly imply guilt and turn Steve over to “the proper authorities”? Why no notice of misconduct for Steve?
Yes indeed, the “alleged” paedophiles of Cornwall can keep right on sleeping tight. As long as they and “the system” have a Perry Dunlop to villify they’re all snug as a bug in the proverbial rug.
And that’s enough for now,