Something’s rotten…

Share Button

Perry has now spent 75 days in jail – for stepping up to the plate to protect children.

****

Hearings resume at 0930 hours (9:30 am) this morning, Wednesday 30 April 2008.

Retired Constable Brian Payment took the stand yesterday and will return to resume his testimony today, Thursday 01 May 2008.

****

Notice of Public Meeting

Date: Thursday 01 May 2008

Time: 7 pm

Place: Army/Navy Club

Address: 13 Marlborough St. N. , Cornwall (Just North of Montreal Rd/Marloborough Rd. intersection)

Those with questions are particularly encouraged to attend.

****

I missed the on air interview at 7:10 am. Had to drive my husband to the Park N’ Ride and just didn’t make it home in time. I asked AM 1220 for a copy. Unfortunately the AM 1220 policy is not release interviews: “We recently updated our interview policy where unless the interview was to help promote a ‘not-for-profit’ group or one of their events, we do not release the interview (except in unusual circumstances).”

But, good news. The interview will re-air between 12 noon and 1 pm and again between 5 pm and 6 pm this evening. So, tune in to AM 1220 at noon! I will definitely catch it this time, and tape it and get it posted 🙂

****

Perry is back at the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre, and, believe it or not, very glad to be back. The past days have been an emotional roller coaster, from the moment a guard arrived at his cell and told him to pack everything right then, he was being transferred to Quinte, to sharing a cell with two “weekenders” in Quinte, to the pain of seeing his little girl, 16-year-old Monica, in tears in the courtroom and being unable hold her in his arms to comfort her.

An emotional roller coaster.

But, bottom line: Perry is thankfully back “home.” I spoke to him ever so briefly last evening. He sounded good, but weary, but, relieved.

****

Interesting testimony yesterday from Brian Payment yesterday. It’s hard as yet to know just what it’s all about, but seems there was a Cornwall area school principal arrested in 1985. There were multiple victims.

Whether the man was convicted or not is at this point unknown. But, the strange thing is there is a publication ban on both his name and the name of the victims! According to Dallas Lee a 1988 Ottawa Citizen article indicated the ban on the Principal’s name had been challenged and lifted in that year. There is a possibility that the ban at the inquiry will be lifted today. I should hope. As it stands whether this unidentified man is a real or “alleged” paedophile is an unknown. I can’t imagine a ban on his name if he was convicted?

Two other interesting things about this: (1) the Children’s Aid Society was not notified, and, (2) then Chief Claude Shaver took a rather unusual interest in the progress of the CPS investigation. Payment said Shaver did encourage his officers to go all out with the investigation.

A few points on the above:

(1) Re Chief Shaver’s involvement Payment said:

He wanted to be kept abreast of this almost right from the start. Sometimes he would come into — into the CIB office before we even started shift and we’re just having coffee and he would ask me how it was going. I don’t know if there was a personal interest; he never indicated to me.

(2) On the day the principal was arrested he, the principal, had just been fired by the school board’;

(3) The Children’s Aid Society asked Payment for information about the allegations. According to Payment he took the unusual step of going to Shaver for direction

Because I wasn’t sure what I could release and what I couldn’t release and because of the Chief’s involvement from the start, I figured if I’m going to ask for advice on what to do in this matter, I might as well go to the top.

Because of the updates, I figured he knew everything that was going on and he could answer the question. He indicated that he would contact Mr. Carriere.

(4) Apparently Shaver refused to release information to the CAS because the investigation was on-going;

(5) Shaver was apparently encouraging the investigation, but, according to Payment:

Well, he was encouraging me to do a full investigation, but I must admit that after 15 years and a suspicious mind, I was wondering why he was taking such an involvement.

Hopefully we learn more on the outcome of this one this morning. The name of the principal was inadvertently uttered. It has been expunged from the transcript but, I caught it as I am sure did many others .

****

More Perry did this Perry did that as Inspector Trew wrapped up his testimony. I just get tired of the spinning and twisting and finger-pointing. Read the transcript.

****

RealityChecker has been pursuing the issue of the David Silmser complaint which led to charges against Perry. I have meanwhile been digging and reading trying to sort this one out. What I have found to date is extremely disturbing. I do believe Reality Checker is bang on. Dave’s complaint was filed against Heidi Sebalj. Heidi got off scott free! Perry was charged!!

We have been told or led to believe time and again that Perry was charged because Dave filed a complaint against him. I now do not believe that is the case.

I have scanned several more documents. I am posting them now. Keep an eye on New to the Site on on the Home page.

I can find no paperwork showing a public complaint was ever filed by Dave against Perry. The only file which seems to exist is that of c.c. 94-01. That’s the complaint against Heidi Sebalj.

I have also discovered that Colin McKinnon was involved in this as early as 09 February 1994 – when the complaint against Heidi filed 21 January 1994 was barely off the ground!

The whole thing smells to high heaven. To say something’s rotten in the state of Denmark is an understatement!
There are a few more documents I want to scan and post in relation to this. Not sure if I will get that accomplished today but will do what I can. I also want to check Justice Colin McKinnon’s comments when he returned to the Cornwall courtroom after his sorti over to the Cornwall Police Station to rummage through his files. That’s when he presumably discovered he had indeed had had prior involvement with Perry Dunlop. He “forgot” about that!

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Something’s rotten…

  1. RealityChecker says:

    Sylvia…I hate to correct you but Dave Silmer’s complaint was not initiated with ONLY Heidi Sebalj in mind! Sure she got off but so did a few others!!! A few more higher ups!!!

    Bryce Geoffries served notice on these individuals on January 11, 1994 by way of a letter that was hand delivered. That is the first step in a public complaint. The person who receives the complaint is the to record it on a complaints form and a copy of that complaint form is to be given to the complaintant. The person making the complaint can also give a statement.

    Read the notice – complaint – letter as to WHO it pertained to…

    “We hereby serve notice that out client will be claiming damages as against the CORNWALL POLICE SERVICES BOARD, the the Cornwall Chief of Police CARL JOHNSTON, Constable HEIDI SEBALJ and, other Officers under the direction of Chief Johnston the names of whom are presently unknown to our client arising out of the numerous violations of our client’s rights and breached of relevant statuatory provisions, which will be herin after summarized inter alia. Genertally, it is our position that ALL OF THE ABOVE NOTED PARTIES have FAILED TO PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES in accordance with the principal of recognizing the importance for respect of victims of crime and understanding their needs as is set forth in Section 1(1) of the Police Service Act, 1993.”

    This is a public complaint against the Cornwall Police Services Board, the Cornwall chief of Police and a police constable within the Cornwall Police Service. Nowhere does it name Constable Perry Dunlop – Nowhere!!!

    JOHNSTON was to provide names of officers unknown to the complaintant who also violated the complaintants rights and breached statuatory provisions. Well I gather Johnston gave a name of an officer who he must have believed fit this bill – Dunlop. Except all Dunlop did was notify CAS and hand over the statement – no rights were violated and no statuatory provisions were breached.

    I can’t believe how David Silmser’s PUBLIC COMPLAINT became so manipulated by those in charge and how it was used visciously to get and nail Perry Dunlop – who wasn’t ever ever named in the complaint to begin with!!!

    Coverup Or Coverup???

  2. RealityChecker says:

    I’m just curious….how does a citizen file a complaint against the Police Services Board – a police chief and a individual officers within any police service if this blatent manipulation of a public complaint is any indication of how PUBLIC COMPLAINTS are handled anywhere in this province?

    I thought the LeSage Report was suppose to correct all these misdeeds…but even so… with the implementation of OCCOPS and their investigations into public complaints against the police what happens if the chief – someone on the board or their legal council are BIG FAT LIARS???

    The citizens and public and victims don’t stand a chance!!!

    Unfortunately – neither did Perry Dunlop!!!

  3. RealityChecker says:

    I am absolutely OUTRAGED by the documents you posted relating to the David Silmser complaint. How the hell can S/Sgt Wells interpret the complaint letter of January 11, 1994 and refer to it in the Public Complaint Form 1 – then twist everything in an Attached Appendix to refer to an unnamed/uninvolved police officer gaining acsess to the complaint and releasing it to the CAS.

    THAT’S NOT WHAT THE JANUARY 11th letter was about AT ALL!!!

    Silmser NAMED the Cornwall Police Services Board, the police chief – Johnston and Constable Heidi Sebalj and Silmser and his lawyer assused them of violating his rights and breaching statuatory provisions by releasing his confidential statement to the News Media NOT the CAS!!!

    The letter states the Cornwall Police Services Board- Johnston and Sebalj FAILED to provide David Silmser with police services under Section 1(1) of the Police Act.

    I need to calm down…..my blood is boiling!!!

    WHERE THE HELL IS ANY ACCOUNTRABILITY WITHIN THE CORNWALL POLICE SERVICE???

    This had NOTHING to do with Perry Dunlop from Day 1!!! The complaint was against the Board – Johnston and Sebalj for failure to provide police services under Sec 1(1) of the Police Act!!!

    Some colleagues – professionals – cops You are!!!

    Damned LIARS!

    Not very much to be proud of is it!

    David Silmser if you read this I can only hope and pray you recognize how you were USED!!!

  4. RealityChecker says:

    Anyone notice THE DATE on Public Complaint Form 1??? Look at the circumstances of the complaint??? Look at the DATE.

    SEPTEMBER 1993 !!!

    Talk about manipulation – read the January 11/94 letter. The date and time of the circumstances of the complaint was January 06, 1994 at 6 pm in the evening!!! On the CJOH/CTV 6 o’clock news. It was NOT September 1993!

  5. RealityChecker says:

    HERE’S A SUMMARY…..

    PUBLIC COMPLAINTS IN ONTARIO DON’T WORK!!!

    – Bryce Geoffries (lawyer for David Silmser) hand delivers a complaint/letter to CPS January 11th, 1994

    – In the letter, the Cornwall Police Services Board, the Chief of the Cornwall Police – Carl Johnston and a Cornwall Police Constable – Heidi Sebalj are named as those involved

    – Geoffries accuses the above of violating Silmer’s rights and breaching statuatory provisions by releasing Silmer’s confidential statement to the News Media.

    – Geoffries also accuses the Cornwall Police Services Board, Johnston and Sebalj of failing to provide police services to David Silmser under Section 1(1) of the Police Act. He goes on in the letter to include specific allegations related to infractions of the Police Act against each of these entities/individuals he NAMES in the complaint letter of January 11, 1994

    – The Police Act 77(2) states “the person who receives the complaint shall record it on a form provided by the Commissioner and shall give a copy of the completed form to the person who makes the complaint”

    – The Police Act 77(3) “The person who makes the complaint shall also be given a statement, in a form provided by the Commioner, that sets out the procedures followed in dealing with a complaint and describes the rights of a complaintant.”

    – Part V of the Police Act goes on as to how Police Complaints are to be handled.

    – Letter of complaint is hand delivered to Cornwall Police January 11, 1994 – first stage in a Public Complaint
    Complaint Form 1 is filled out by S/Sgt B. Wells (Professional Standards) and is signed by David Silmser – 10 days later on January 21, 1994

    – Complaint Form 1 only NAMES Constable Heidi Sebalj – accuses her of releasing confidential statement in the course of a Police investigation – the Board and Johnston are missing in the complaint. Reference is made in this Complaint Form to the January 11th letter/complaint

    – S./Sgt Wells attaches an Appendix to Complaint Form 1 – making reference to an unnamed/uninvolved officer who obtained the confidential statement and released it to the Children’s Aid (No NAMES are mentioned in this Appendix)

    – Date on circumstances of complaint in Complaint Form 1 is SEPTEMBER 1993 – no time (In other words referring to when Dunlop provided CAS with Silmer’s statement)

    – Date on circumstances of complaint in ORIGINAL January 11, 1994 letter/complaint from Geoffries against the Board, Johnston and Sebalj is January 06, 1994 with the release of the confidential statement to CJOH/CTV and subsequent broadcast of the confidential statement on the 6 pm evening news – January 06, 1994 followed by other news releases in the days following.

    – Complaint Form 1 becomes File # C.C. 94-01

    – S./Sgt. Wells files an Interm Report on File 94-01 on Febuary 21, 1994 as he is mandated to do under the Police Act. He indicates no new information and final report on File C.C. 94-01 will follow

    – S/Sgt Wells files final report on File C.C. 94-01 March 21, 1994 exonerating Heidi Sebalj.

    – NO MENTION OF THE BOARD OR CHIEF JOHNSTON

    – FIle C.C. 94-01 is then used to bring Police Act charges against Cornwall Police Constable Perry Dunlop

    – Dunlop faces a Board of Inquiry for Police Misconduct BASED ON File C.C. 94-01

    MISUSE- ABUSE of The PUBLIC COMPLAINT SYSTEM IN ONTARIO!!!

    The original complaint/letter of January 11, 1994 by Silmser/Geoffries had absolutely nothing to do with Perry Dunlop yet this first stage (letter/complaint) in the public complaint system MORPHED into a complaint against Perry Dunlop for releasing a confidential statement to CAS. It was then used to bring Police Act charges against Dunlop. The Complaint was NEVER about Perry Dunlop releasing the statement to CAS!!! The BOARD, JOHNSTON and SEBAL got off scott free and the issue and accusations levelled at the these entities/individuals for releasing Silmer’s confidential statement to the NEWS MEDIA, violating Silmer’s rights, breaching statuatory provisions and failing to provide Silmser with Police Services went unchecked!!!

    No wonder I and others have absolutely no faith in the SYSTEM!!!!

  6. RealityChecker says:

    Want to see the Snow Job at the Inquiry???

    From transcripts April 22 bottom page 151 -152 lines 25 – line 1

    Callagan: “Now, you’re aware DS made a formal, public complaint against Perry Dunlop?”

    Quinn responds – No.

    CPS lawyers leading their own cops on as to Silmser filing a formal public complaint against Perry Dunlop. Yeah right Mr. Callagan – WHERE IS IT???

  7. RealityChecker says:

    Someone should really start asking and delving into HOW the higherups in the Cornwall Police Service COVERUP the misdeeds of their corrupt practices and corrupt cops. I’m not just talking about the COVERUP with the church and the pedofiles. There’s so much MORE!!!

    What about the COVERUP related to the King George Fire in 1997!!!

    Look what’s hidden in CanII that deserves some explanation…

    http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=Cornwall&language=en&searchTitle=Ontario&path=/en/on/onsc/doc/2008/2008canlii571/2008canlii571.html

    THE COURT MADE VARIOUS FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE WIRETAP INVESTIGATION AND CONCLUDED THERE HAD BEEN AN EGREGIOUS ABUSE OF PROCESS AND OF THE CHARTER.

    These cops should have faced Police Act charges or related discipline as to their profession – ALL OF THEM – Where’s the results of the investigations on their conduct???

    Sec 49(1) – Restrictions on Secondary duties. The wiretap was paid for by the Insurance Company!!!

    Read the transcripts of this – you will be appauled!!!

    Seems the CORNWALL POLICE SERVICE is NOTED for Egregious Abuse of process and of the Charter. Not just related to what they did to Perry Dunlop but other investigations too!!!

  8. RealityChecker says:

    These guys should have faced Police Act charges…..according to the suit the wiretapping was not only PAID for by the insurance company but these named cops (Bissonette, Raccinne, Brunet, Snyder, Repa) – they were not acting as public authorities when investigating the alleged crime or acting pursuant to any proper duty or power. They were acting for and being paid by a private insurance company.

    Whoever was representing them in this suit tried to put forth a defence about limitations – but they put it forth the argument using the Public Authorities Protection Act. Absolutely NOTHING about the fact they weren’t even allowed to do this under the Police Act – restrictions on secondary activities. Where’s a Police Act investigation – or discipline??? The Chief and The Board are named in the suit and he’d be the one to say whether there would be an investigation or discipline. Doesn’t look like anyone got investigated OR disciplined within the Cornwall Police Service!!!

Leave a Reply