No chink in the armour here

[9:40 am. Hearings will commence at 10:30 am. A “technical” difficulty has somehow prevented Justice Gllaude reading his decison and dispersing copies afterwards. ]

Hearings resume at 1930 hours 2030 hours (9:30 am 10:30 am EST) this morning, Thursday 28 March 2008. Justice Normand Glaude is scheduled to render his decision on the terms of reference , a matter which has been at the heart of the latest ballyhoo in the Weave Shed. Following the rendering of the decision Staff Sgt. Garry Derochie will take the stand.

Which way the commissioner will rule o the terms of reference matter is up in the air. If he should rule against the arguments of the Children’s Aid Society and Cornwall Police Service to expunge or render null and void the testimony of approximately 20 victim/”alleged” victim witnesses we may see yet another sorti off to Divisional Court. Those agitating have support in the Weave Shed for their arguments which, it seems, rely on their interpretation of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s interpretation of the mandate.

The question now is what is Justice Normand Glaude’s interpretation of the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of the mandate? Does he stick with his interpretation of the mandate? Or does he give way to the interpretations of the Court of Appeal interpretations of the mandate?

Will the commissioner perchance decide to appeal the Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada? That however has risk in that the Supreme Court would interpret the mandate in accordance with Court of Appeals interpretation? The again it might favour his interpretation. Either way when time is at a premium the process would inevitably cause more delays.

Might he, as touched on above, dismiss all or parts of the arguments as misinterpretations of the Court of Appeal interpretations and thereby risk another trip by one or more parties down the well-beaten inquiry path to Divisional Court? And more delays.

Or, might he yield to the arguments and concur with the interpretations of the interpretation of the mandate …….and thereby risk the consequences of seriously re-victimizing those victims/”alleged” victims who will deduce that taking the stand was an exercise in futility and they were simply used?

A mess. He’s caught between a rock and hard place.

And we’re back to the mandate! A decent mandate would have averted so many trips to Divisional Court and so much anguish for the victims. A mandate more in keeping with the Project Truth mandate.

The sad thing here is that it’s the victims who suffer. As I see it they are the ones who were seduced and used and abused to give this “inquiry” the credence it needed to come to it’s predetermined conclusion, i.e., they didn’t know; they didn’t understand; no one knows a lot about man/boy sex abuse but we’re all learning; policies, practices and procedures weren’t always the greatest but they’re evolving, and they keep evolving; there was a shortage of funding here and a lack of staff there; there was a little negligence here and few oversights there; there was a lack of communication between these ones in this institution and a little miscommunication between those ones in that institution; and, of course, there is and never was a ring/clan pack of paedophiles and there is and never was a cover-up. Perry Dunlop will receive honourable mention.

*****

And speaking of Perry…..

I talked to Perry yesterday. He sounds a little tired, but he’s holding up. Truly, considering the circumstances, he is in amazingly good spirits. He has a little stub of a pencil and is collecting his thoughts for Wednesday.

That said I am beginning to think Perry is being treated worse than a murderer, or, for that matter, a paedophile. He has yet to be sentenced on one charge of civil contempt and he’s being treated worse than a murder or a paedophile.

Did Charlie spend one single day in jail? Did Jacques Leduc?

What about Malcolm MacDonald? Look the facts there. Malcolm pled guilty to obstructing justice. Guilty!! He got an absolute discharge!!! An absolute discharge!!! Perry languishes in jail. One conviction of civil contempt.

Did Malcolm spend a single day in jail?

Perry has.

II am having quite a time wrapping my head around all of this. When I heard that Perry has two fifteen minute visits a week I was outraged. I had to remind myself that Perry Dunlop is actually in jail. I find now that I have to remind myself frequently that there are certain things which one should anticipate as par for the course for a prisoner, even when the prisoner in question is a man whose greatest crime in life was that he tried to protect children.

There are certain things which seem to go with the territory of being in jail. As much as I question it, two fifteen minute visits a week is presumably is one of them. There are others things which seem to be part and parcel of being locked up like a common criminal. The noise at night – the ruckus when inmates clang and rattle the bars on their cells. And the restrictions on access to a phone. And all those precautions which ensure that an inmate doesn’t hang himself, or stab himself or have the wherewithal to orchestrate an escape.

That presumably is part of being I jail.

But, then I wonder is there no place a little more humane where “they” could lock up a decent family man? One with a civil contempt sentence pending? Who hasn’t had a bail hearing? Did it have be that setting?

Could they not deprive him of some of life’s amenities in elsewhere? Somewhere where he could visit a little more often? and be trusted not to hang himself high? with a TV in his cell? maybe even a computer? Enough amenities to be humane and enough deprivations that he could still perhaps be seduced and eager to grasp that dangling carrot of freedom – “testify.”

Anyway, there is poor dear Perry. No wrist watch to tell the time of day. Mail not getting through to him yet. Shoelace restrictions. Clothing restrictions. Severe visiting restrictions. Severe phone restrictions.

That it seems is the order of the day. This is what Justice Glaude and Peter Engelmann asked for, and there it is.

But, and this perhaps goes well beyond Perry, what about this? One shower since his arrest 17 February 2008. Still in the same orange T-shirt and jump pants and all which were issued upon his arrival at the Toronto Detention Centre. No access to a phone for three days. No mail delivery as of yesterday. No blanket. A week’s growth of beard when he was visited on Monday.

Perry is barely out of cell. Out for the visits – twice a week. Out for a shower – when he’s lucky enough to get one. I think out to use the phone – when his turn comes every three days or so.

Believe it or not – not outside in the fresh air for one single moment! Not once!!! .

Helen talked to the Superintendent of the jail. Three guards are required to escort him to the shower or outdoors she was told. There is a shortage of staff!

Short staffed? A decent man locked up in a 12×7 cell 24/7 and deprived the light of day because they’re short staffed?!

And all of this to force Perry back to the Weave Shed?

All of this to satisfy Justice Glaude? The same judge who, let’s never forget, once upon a time so eloquently told the world: “It is essential for the success of this Inquiry that people come forward, free from any undue influence, promise or threat”?

Perry is exercising in his cell. He works at keeping his mind busy. He has a little stub of a pencil to jot down his thoughts. He’s preparing for Wednesday.

Hang in there Perry.

Quite a way to treat whistle-blower isn’t it? A whistle-blower who blew the whistle for children. Quite a reward for stepping up to the plate for children.

But, he’s holding his own. He sees this tribulation as a learning experience. He is watching, and listening and learning.

Good for you Perry. Keep your mind active. Look for the blessings. They’re there.

What was it Paul Scott said on the radio Tuesday morning? Something about Perry refusing to testify shows us ‘a little chink in the armour of heroism’?

I think not Paul. I think not. To the contrary. I believe this shows that Perry is a man of principle who has the courage of his convictions. Alas, men of his ilk are few and far between.

Little Shawna Deroy and Katie Howe say Perry’s their hero.

There it is, from the mouths of babes. They know. They just inherently know that Perry would never do anything to harm a child. They know he protects children. They instinctively know that against insurmountable odds he has given and will always give his all to protect children. Even if means going to jail.

Perry’s their hero.

Rightly so 🙂

****

Keep the prayers going. Perry needs prayers to carry him through this ordeal. Pray up a storm. Have Masses said for him. Get prayer chains going. Lots and lots of prayers.

And keep the letters and cards going. One of these days Perry will get his mail. Make sure he has swamped – enough to keep him reading and smiling for hours. Let him know you care.

And, while you’re at, tell Justice Glaude what you think about this travesty of justice, and the Ontario Attorney General, and everyone on the list and whoever else you can think of.

Pass the word.

And, don’t forget, the need for financial assistance is on-going.

****

Note the article by Barbara Kay in yesterday’s National Post. I posted that for two very particular reasons: (1) the all too familiar plight of the whistle-blower, and (2) the recognition that gender politics rules the roost when it comes to issues of domestic violence. For years we in Ontario have been privy to gender bias in the astounding lack of research on man/boy sex abuse and the abysmal absence of counselling centres open to male victims much less geared specifically and solely for male victims of same-sex sexual abuse.

The article made me ponder what becomes the male victim of man/boy sexual abuse who falls into the clutches of those domestic violence experts referenced in Kay’s article? What becomes the male victim who is seen through the prism of the radical feminist lens? What becomes the male victim whose counselling comes from the hands of one who embraces this radical feminist agenda?

What becomes of them?

That’s what I’d like to know? What becomes them?

Enough for now

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

P.S. Not a boo anywhere about yesterday’s cancellation. [I see it. Jusitce Glaude took an extra to make his decision!! ]