Note the videos:
17 Feb. ’08: The first attempt to arrest Perry Dunlop (the mounties arrived without the warrant – video clip)
17 Feb. ’08: THE ARREST OF PERRY DUNLOP
There is an on-going issue playing out in the Duncan provincial courthouse regarding the validity of the arrest warrant. The matter was heard yesterday by a judge Woods, a retired Court of Appeal judge who now hears cases in provincial court. As it now stands Perry been remanded to the court house in Duncan for today (Tuesday, 120 February 2008) at 0900 hours (9 am) Pacific Standard Time. That’s noon Eastern Standard Time.
That is the extent of my knowledge of the matter at this time. As soon as I hear anything I will advise. Meanwhile, pray up a storm for resolution, and for peace, strength and wisdom for Perry and Helen.
And meanwhile, at the Weave Shed in Cornwall, hearings resumed at 0930 hours this morning, Tuesday 19 February 2008. 17 Feb. ’08. Today’s business is “Argument on Terms of Reference.”
As far as where things are at nearly three full years after the inquiry was commissioned, that says it all!
Today is sort of an emergency session. The gathered throng was supposed to have the week off, but, they’re still bickering away trying to sort out what the commission’s mandate actually is. This round relates to the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision to overturn an earlier decision of Justice Normand Glaude’s to hear testimony from a woman who alleges she was raped at the age of sixteen by two teenage boys. That decision was challenged by the Ontario Provincial Police, upheld on challenge at Divisional Court, and overturned – in a unanimous decision – by the Ontario Court of Appeal. In the latter Glaude got his knuckles firmly wrapped for going beyond the scope of the mandate – as interpreted by the justices!
A challenge by Glaude to the Appeal Court’s ruling would take this to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Does the inquiry include or exclude physical and emotion abuse? Does it include or exclude assault/abuse/sexual overtures by those not in positions of authority and trust?
A mess. A royal unmitigated mess.
Does it include or exclude sex acts perpetrated against those age 21 or over. What does and does not constitute a young person? What does and does ot constitute historical?
So, now the arguments are running hot and heavy from various quarters to expunge the evidence of various witnesses who have already testified!!!
What this will do to those real and “alleged” victims who were told that their testimony was essential to the inquiry is beyond me.
More re-victimization of the victims. These poor souls were rounded up, herded like cattle cattle and marched into the inquiry. I recall way back then saying they were like lambs to the slaughter.
As far as I’m concerned once the decision was made to use these witnesses and throw them on the stand to hear their evidence – and considering that that decision went unchallenged or sanctioned by the courts – their testimony should stand.
You don’t do this to people. You just don’t treat people like this.
The mandate. The mandate. The mandate.
God help us. The victims are no more than pawns. Pawns in this ongoing game to prosecute Perry Dunlop and protect the paedophiles.
This is an outrage!!!
God help those victims when they understand what’s going on the Weave Shed now.
I am on my way on the first leg of my trip to Toronto this evening. Then it’s into a van and onto the road at 4:30 am tomorrow.
I hope and pray people of Ontario are sufficiently outraged by this travesty of justice and judicial bullying to get down to Osgoode Hall in Toronto for 10 am tomorrow.
Time: 10 am
Date: Wednesday, 20 February 2008
Place: Ontario Divisional Court
Address: 130 Queen St. West (Osgoode Hall) Toronto, Ont.
Enough for now