Been there. Done that

Share Button

Five days! Thanks to a little judicial muscle flexing the Dunlops will be forced – yes forced – to appear at the Weave Shed, 17 September 2007, Helen’s Birthday! “The system” has been hunting Perry Dunlop down for 14 years. Now they’re after both.

More on this travesty to come. For now, a time change: Contrary to previous notice action in the coliseum commences at 1300 hours (1 pm) Monday 17 September 2007. The Dunlops’ summons says 10 am. For whatever reason that has changed. Perhaps the gathered throng don’t want to catch their respective planes, trains and automobiles until Monday morning? Anyway, this morning Mr. Engelmann announced start time is 1 pm. The afternoon will kick off with a few preparatory comments from Justice Glaude.

****

The Coalition for Action has been granted full standing and funding limited to those issues directly affecting its interests. Justice Glaude decided to deny standing to Carson as an individual. In so doing Glaude’s intrigue with how many horses, cats and dogs Carson owns and the monetary value of all has been laid to rest.

What ‘limited to those issues directly affecting the interests’ of Coalition means and who determines which issues are or are not relevant I have no idea.

Funding has been granted for one senior and one junior lawyer. Funding will cover attendance in the Weave Shed of one lawyer only. They lawyers can rotate but, for example, if both sit in on hearings at the same time there will only be funding for one of the two.

Justice Glaude closed with a mini lecture and debriefing for Frank Horn, counsel for the Coalition. Horn was chastised for his “rhetoric” and told that some of his comments on 10 September 2007 were “unfortunate” and “unhelpful.” He also told Horn to advise his client that the use of profanities will not be tolerated. (Did Carson utter an oath when the merry-go-round about his horses began? No idea. The webcast certainly didn’t pick it up.)

****

And, surprise! surprise!. The gathered throng has unanimously concluded – or perhaps the large majority has concluded? – they really do not want to expunge Ron Leroux’ testimony.  It seems the plan now is to work up something akin to the Let’s Pretend David Silmser is on the Stand fiasco. This would be the Let’s Pretend Ron Leroux is on the Stand fiasco, but, as I mentioned before, with a difference. The object of the exercise with the Let’s Pretend David Silmser is on the stand was to soundly discredit David Silmser and make him look like a liar.  Ron Leroux has essentially testified that he is a liar. If we are to believe Ron’s testimony now – I do say “IF” – then he lied to Perry Dunlop and he lied to police and he lied to all sorts of people – for years on end.

The discrediting has been done.

The job at hand for the collective now is to surmise that Ron would testify that he is now telling the truth, and then to pull out documents to buttress their theory that everything – absolutely everything – he said in the past was a lie, including every word in every statement and including his sex abuse allegations against Fathers Bernard Cameron, Monsignor McDougald and Bishop Eugene Larocque.

And of course a big part of the Let’s Pretend game will go to surmising that under cross-examination Ron would say that Perry Dunlop was a villain, a scoundrel, a good-for-nothing liar, a rogue cop, someone who insisted Ron label homosexuals as paedophiles etc etc etc. And somehow, whether or not Ron is labelled a liar by the collective or not, that will stand.

And rest assured that at the end of the Let’s Pretend game Ron Leroux’ affidavit will be in the dust

It should be entertaining. Not enlightening. Entertaining. Pathetically entertaining.
That little circus, the Let’s Pretend Ron Leroux is on the Stand game, is on hold until the week of 01 October 2007. And it’s on hold because everyone’s busy getting ready for the Dunlops!

Busy. Busy. Busy. Throw a little sawdust on the floor to facilitate the clean up. Beyond that it’s simply a case of hold the starving lions at bay until someone lets them loose.

Am I cynical? Well, yes. I suppose I am indeed.

Been there. Done that.

I’ve watched them go after Perry before. Not perhaps on as grand a scale. Just a judge and everyone on the defence team and everyone on the Crown team joining forces against Perry Dunlop. Perhaps 7:1. Something like that.

Whatever the numbers, I assure you, it wasn’t pretty.

****

Dr. Donaleen Hawes, Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario testified this morning and into the early afternoon. I missed portions but, well, really it was more about evolving practices and procedures with the Catholic school boards, and who was or is nor responsible for what and to whom.

More “framing.” More cause to rationalize, excuse and justify the abysmal and astounding failure of adults to protect children from sexual predators.

Enough for now,

Sylvia(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Cornwall, Cornwall Public Inquiry, David Silmser. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Been there. Done that

  1. Myomy says:

    Wonderful. More testimony about practices, policies and procedures in the various institutions which may have to deal with allegations of sexual abuse. I am sure they have many thick binders of this material in their courthouse at cornwall. I have a little mental exercise for the readers of this blog. Let your imagination run free. What new practice, policy or procedure would you introduce that would have made everything go right? I defy anyone including Glaude with his stacks of binders to show me a new parctice, policy or procedure that would remedy the problem when there is corruption at the top of the institutions applying the practices, policies and procedures. Any organization will take on the integrity of it’s leaders. If the people at the top are without integrity the underlings will be impelled to do likewise. If they do not they end up in the predicament of Perry and Helen Dunlop. There is a saying that covers this: ” The fish rots from the head “. Institutions become corrupt throught when the people at the top are corrupt. When institutions are corrupt no practice, policy or procedure will make things right. The people involved will always find a way around the guidelines. These guidelines are like locks on the door. They only keep out the honest people.

Leave a Reply

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