Kangaroo court

Share Button

Lunch break. Hearings resume at 14:00 hours (2 pm) this afternoon, Wednesday 24 October 2007.

(Fifteen minute break called  at 2:45 pm while Justice Glaude ponders whether or not to throw Perry back in the coliseum and unleash his pride.  Hearings resume at 3 pm.  ANd, a tip of the judicial hand when Glaude advised hearings will run late today and tomorrow and on into Friday if need be.  )

****

Well, they’re out to get another pound of flesh off Perry Dunlop’s thoroughly picked over and ravaged carcas.

I had chills watching the kangaroo court in action this morning. Chills.

This is a public inquiry?

In Canada?

Into the institutional response to historic allegations of abuse?

Not.

It’s the vindictive persecution – and prosecution! – of an honest cop who dared to blow the whistle …to protect children.

Were you watching? I don’t think a soul could watch that debacle without knowing that Perry Dunlop’s rights aren’t worth a penny.

For that matter, I don’t think anyone could watch without appreciating that all the ballyhoo we hear about solicitor-client privilege is just that: ballyhoo. If a den of lawyers wants at you they’ll find a way – legally.

This morning session started with Charles Bourgeois sworn in and testifying that Perry Dunlop does not want to waive his solicitor-client privilege.

Seems that Bourgeois is another of the chosen who have been forced to testify. He was subpoened and told to bring all his Perry-related files. He has none.

It seems to that originally Bourgeois was told NOT to contact Perry Dunlop to ask him to Waive his solicitor-client privilege. Then within the past number of days he was told he had to contact Perry. Then, he contacted the Laws Society of Upper Canada to ask what to do if his clients refuse to waive privilege. He was told he has an obligation to honour the privilege – unless he is legally ordered to waive it.

With that, away went the pride. Led by Simon Ruel (inquiry lawyer) and, right on his heels Allan Manson (Citizens for Community Renewal), – the move is afoot to strip Perry of his solicitor-client privilege and lay him bare.

This isn’t a trial? It’s not adversarial? It’s not about Project Truth?
And, … it’s really NOT about Perry Dunlop?

Could fool us all on that.

There were two interventions against stripping Perry of his rights, one from Frank Horn (Coalition) the other from Dallas Lee (Victims Group). Two out the denful. Two. Good submissions I might add, but only two. The den can chew them up and spit them out. They’re the majority. The LARGE majority.
It’s up to Glaude. He seems remarkable in favour. No surprise there I suppose.

I am sick. Shouldn’t be. I saw this coming over two years ago. But ‘m sick.

A national disgrace. A kangaroo court.
They’re back. Must run.

God help Perry. And God help us all.

The trial of Perry Dunlop is back in session….

Enough for now,

Sylvia.
(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Kangaroo court

  1. prima facie says:

    Sylvia:

    You mentioned in your recent blog that the witness/Lawyer Bourgeois, went to seek an opinion from the Law Society of Upper Canada.
    In my opinion and based on my interactions with “The Law Society”….”it” has no teeth….it’s a “CLUB” of elitist, self-managed, self-serving, lawyers and their aids…probably managed by the very lawyer’s sitting in “The Cornwall Public Inquiry” today.

    BELIEVE me, unfortunately, “things” are not as “WE” would like to see “things” or that “WE” may “PERCEIVE” things “SHOULD” be at the Law Society of Upper Canada.

    It was my discovery that “Cornwall Public Inquiry” lawyer’s are/have been Chairperson’s to various committee’s during questionable times in their personal careers. I may sound cynical to some, but “authority and power” left unchecked, leads to corruption. WE THE CITIZEN’S have let this get to where it is today, because we have done nothing to hold this “group” accountable.

    I MEAN, did you see the Inquiry today people? What ever happenned to solicitor/attorney-client priviledge? Not even a challenge by anyone, about solicitor/attorney-client priviledges.

    Also, no-one asserting from the “position” that “maybe” sexual abuse took place and maybe Constable Perry Dunlop was doing the right thing and maybe the “statements” were/are “for real”…..NO ONE!!! ABSOLUTELY NO-ONE!!! Just brutal!!
    Instead, the Weave Shed is completely loaded with a room full of “mal-practice and liability insurance carrier” lawyers protecting the “accused”…….add in a sprinkling of self-serving opportunists.

  2. Myomy says:

    This inquiry continues to reflect the same institutional response from the past. In the past there were many perpetrators who held influential positions but only one cop with integrity. Now we have many lawyers defending the various perps and only two that speak up for Perry in the question of solicitor client privilege. The Dunlops should have been given ten damn good lawyers right from the start to learn their story and represent their interests at the inquiry and form an effective counter balance to the array of lawyers on the other side. Sadly this is no more than a dream in the conduct of the Cornwall public inquiry.

Leave a Reply