They’re off in camera again: 1503 (3:05 pm) Tuesday 20 November 2007. Don’t know how long this session will take.
Brian Lindblom, an expert in forensic document examination is on the stand. Seems his scrutiny of the Garry Guzzo “obliterations” shows discrepancies in names obliterated and names given to match the obliteration. In some instances Lindblom testifies he can see that one or more lettering don’t match and it seems that in others perhaps he can see that the entire name does not match. There are still others that he has been unable to analyze – there is no way he can see through the obliteration to the lettering.
As they headed off Justice Glaude assured we on the webcast that there are parties in there representing all our interests, and made specific mention of the Victims Group and the Citizens for Community Renewal. The Citizens for Community does not represent the interests of the large majority of the people of Cornwall. That has become abundantly clear over recent months.
Which reminds me. I am told that Peter Wardle one of the CCR lawyers, showed up briefly in the Toronto courtroom yesterday. Apparently as soon as it was clear the three “honourable” justice were proceeding with the “hearing” and not debating an adjournment Wardle was gone. (A few days back Perry had asked for more time. The request was instantly denied.)
So, what took Mr. Wardle in to the Divisional Court lynching?
Was he there to ensure that the lynching proceeded on schedule? Or, was he perhaps there to argue against an adjournment in the event the justices had a sober second thought when they realized Perry was nowhere to be seen and had been denied (1) opportunity to be very ably represented by his wife, (2) a postponement to sort out finances and make preparations, and (3) funding assistance?
Was it just idle curiosity that took him there?
No idea. The only for sure is he certainly wasn’t there arguing to let Helen Dunlop represent Perry. Nor was he there to argue that Perry’s request for additional time should be heeded. Nor did he stick around to ensure Justice Glaude’s bidding was doe by Glaude’s three “honourable” colleagues.
Actually, for what I hear the whole thing was probably in the bag before the “honourable” trio took the bench. Seems the papers ordering Perry to testify at Weave Shed courtroom were drawn and ready to go.
Anyway, Justice Glaude’s attempts to portray a level playing field in the Weave Shed in or out of camera don’t wash. He played cat and mouse with the Coalition two years go when he turned down its application for standing and funding. No fourth degree for the CCR but the Coalition certainly got it! It was only when the canon started to aim at Carson Chisholm that the Coalition decided to re-apply. Interesting, in that instance Carson wanted to apply as an individual. An inquiry lawyer (Stauffer) told Carson, no, he should apply as the Coalition. Whether or not it was the plan what it certainly did was take Glaude off the hook for turning the group down in the first place. Now, after months upon months without a community voice in there the Coalition has standing and two lawyers who don’t have a clue what’s going on!
Not what I’d call a level playing field! Much like the Cornwall Police Service going through the back door to pay for its pricey legal team. If the CPS wants funding why is not a soul insisting it go into the Weave Shed to apply for funding? Why have Premier Dalton McGuinty and former Attorney General Michael Bryant not ordered the CPS to apply for funding and be subject to the caps and restrictions on legal fees like everyone else who has funding?
Where’s the level playing field here? Everyone knows CPS is playing both ends to the middle and not a soul is stopping it.
Millions through the back door for CPS to retain the manpower and pricey lawyers it needs to draw and quarter Perry Dunlop. No funds for Perry Dunlop to finance a trip to Ontario Divisional Court to defend himself.
Where’s the level playing field Justice Glaude?
I get disgusted beyond words at the injustice. Do these “honourable” justices really think the Dunlops have a money tree in their backyard?
****
No sign of them yet on the webcast. I am preparing a list of volunteers to do jail time for Perry. Also a contact list with addresses and phone nos and email addresses for those who are ready to sound off. Will post it before day’s end.
Enough for now,
Sylvia
“Everyone’s interest is being represented!” Hello-“Twilight Zone”..yes, Judge Glaude, we belive you Sir.
Paul Scott’s “Community Coalition” and the likes of John Swale’s/Ledroit Beckett’s “Victim’s Goup” is anything but representing the interests of the communtiy. It is my belief, John Swales was parachuted into Cornwall by one or more Law Firms, to “round-up” victims for civil litigations. I am told he spent the first two days “hyping-up” everyone “gathered”, about the potential of millions in settlements; as he once achieved in London, Ontario.
Mr. Swales made a public appearance at the Inquiry, with Mr. Leroux (one day)the first day Mr. Leroux testified. Then as things “duck-tailed”, Swales disappeared. He has tried to keep out of the public eye since…(“finders fees” and percentages”)….”sicko.”
Judge Glaude and this Public Inquiry, is obsessed with finding out who the “informants” are. The “informants” who helped Garry Guzzo and others investigate or discover related facts. Judge Glaude is obsessed with finding the informants as opposed to being focussed on learning “the facts.” IT gets VERY DANGEROUS (for us)when the “POWERS THAT BE”, including Judge Glaude and the Ontario Justice System, feel defensive. EXPECT multiple “lynchings” in January 2008 and beyond.
Also, as you know Sylvia, Paul Scott seemingly, is nothing more than an unfortunate “opportunist”, working his way into the community, attempting to secure support by, in part, making various “alleged”, “self-disclosures” in his effort to gain that, support.
FINALLY: I’m sure news media have contacted you, Sylvia, for additional information. I’m certain “they” have viewed your website http://www.theinquiry.ca and have stated it is a treasure of information. In fact, one “media”, expert witness, testified at the inquiry, your website was an example of in-depth journalism. In fact, the Inquiry, refers to you fittingly, as a journalist..YET, despite several years now, NO MAINSTREAM NEWS MEDIA HAS PUBLICLY MENTIONED YOUR WEBSITE EVEN EXISTS, nor do they reference your site as a “source.” GET REAL!!
Do YOU think there is “CONTROL” of the news media, with this issue…PEOPLE?
How about buying space in the newspaper or sending “newstips” to news programs, stating,
a)-read the facts,
b)-learn the facts, c)-express yourselves.
GO TO http://www.theinquiry.ca