Love at first sight

Share Button

Perry has now spent 100 days in jail – for stepping up to the plate to protect children, and then daring to say he has lost faith in the justice system. This is the institutional response to allegations of childhood sexual abuse.


Hearings resume at 1300 hours (1 pm) Monday, 02 June 2008. Constable Rene Desrosier will return to continue his examination in chief. The schedule for the remainder of the week isn’t available yet. As soon as it’s up I will post.


It was love at first sight. Today I took my little 10-week-old-grand-daughter in to visit Perry at the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre. It’s always a bit of a mystery how a wee one will respond to a new face, never mind on the other side of a plexi-glass divider. Well, I put her up to the divider, she looked at Perry, and she grinned from ear to ear! And she didn’t stop! ! She studied ever single inch of Perry’s face, and I do believe every hair on his head as well his chin, and she studied his orange jumpsuit, and she smiled, and she cooed. She didn’t take her eyes off Perry and she didn’t stop smiling at him.

That was a fun visit 🙂 Perry was tickled. Baby was enchanted. My son was as proud as punch of his little girl. And I watched in awe!

I don’t know that Perry even noticed that baby was appropriately dressed for the occasion in a little black and white striped sleeper!

Anyway, a nice nice visit. The magic, innocence and purity of a baby. A little ray of sunshine. And that little wee baby fell in love with Perry in an instant. In her little heart she knows 🙂


Perry is doing well. He’s been getting yard time bright and early in the morning. The baby birds are still in the nest. He watches the momma and poppa head out through the little opening in the overhang in search of food. Then back into he yard with a worm. We are wondering how the little ones will ever find their way out of the enclosure once they start to fly. But, they’ll find a way. He is looking forward to perhaps catching the first flight 🙂

A cold breakfast this morning. No banana in the larder so no Elvis sandwich today. He thinks it must be time for a hot breakfast – hopefully that’s what’s on the menu in the morning.

Supper today sounded like a bit of a stir fry. Chicken with rice and a sweet and sour sauce of some sort. Not too bad said Perry. An orange on the side.

I don’t think I told you how Perry stretches out his juice. There is a cup of real juice with breakfast. Then there are a couple of packages of juice crystals which can be mixed with tap water during the day. Perry started mixing them all together. He might have a mix of real orange juice with lemon crystals. Or real apple juice with orange crystals. He’s experimenting! And coming up with some interesting taste combinations in the process.

He reads his three daily newspapers from top to bottom and cover to cover. He’s well up on the news.

Nan’s death is still on his mind, and without doubt will be for some time. I pass on little bits and pieces I’ve heard about her to Perry, and Perry fills in with a story or two of his own. She must have been quite a lady. I wish I had had the good fortune to meet her. But, I get a small taste of her in her progeny. A lovely family.


I believe Perry’s next court appearance on 17 June will be back at Osgoode Hall in Toronto. That I must confirm, but I suggest you check you calendar and mark the day. Those hoping to make the trip and/or catch a ride should start making plans now.


I posted an article from a Duncan newspaper a few days ago re the $100 carbon tax rebate which will be issued to all B.C. taxpayers. Bernie Langkammer had become familiar with Perry and Helen’s plight and decided that it would be great if people re-directed the refund to the Dunlops. As he said, $100 won’t make or break some people, so, if that’s the case, redirect it to the Dunlops. Or, as he also said, send along $20 of the refund. Or $50. It will be greatly appreciated and put to good use.

The Langakammer’s got in touch with me. We decided it would be best to open a new account in Helen’s name in Duncan, B.C. Helen has signed the paperwork and the account is now active in Helen’s name.

Monies can be deposited at any CIBC bank in British Columbia. The Duncan branch was going to spread the word to other CIBC outlets in the province that deposits could be made in Helen Dunlop’s name. I believe however it is also good to have the account number.

Therefore, the details for those planning to redirect all or part of their $100 refund to the Dunlop family:

Bank: CIBC

Account name: Helen Dunlop

Transit #: 240

Account #: 83-23038

All you B.C. residents, please pass the word to family, friends, neighbours and co-workers. Ask you minister or priest to make an announcement or put a note in the bulletin. Get the word around. Contact your local radio and TV stations. Ask them to get the word out.

(Those across the country who also wish to contribute via this account can certainly do so.)


A reminder about Air Miles. When making any purchases which offer Air Miles rewards, use Helen’s Air Miles number.


Those points will go directly into Helen’s account.

Also a reminder that Air Miles already accrued can be ‘dumped’ and given to Helen.

The Air Miles make it possible for Helen and the girls to visit Perry. Helen and at least one of the girls will be back in time for Perry’s next court appearance (17 June 2008). Write Helen’s number down on a Stick-It note and stick it to your Air Miles card. That way you won’t forget. And, if you have been planning – like me! – to pass on your accrued Air Miles but haven’t quite gotten around to, now is the time. I’m going to do it tomorrow for sure. I don’t have a lot, maybe 600, but with someone else’s they will go toward a trip for one of Perry’s girls.


I heard from the U.S.A. that Father David Ostler was returning to the bedside of the his brother Father Gary Ostler. Father Gary Ostler is apparently in poor health. Whether true or not I was told he had bleeding ulcers, followed by a stroke and was then put on a respirator. Keep the Ostler family in your prayers.


I haven’t been getting much done on the website 🙁 These weeks of recess at the inquiry are turning into my time to get on top of things at home. Our car is about to give up the ghost so we are car hunting, and I’m busy checking out VIN numbers, and prices and so on. A good time to do it. Also have some bedding plants lined up by the drive-way waiting to be transplanted. So, I’ll get caught up while I have the opportunity. Sometimes I don’t dare come near the computer _ one thing leads to another leads another and before I know it I’ve spent the day. This week I must ration my time 🙂 I still plan to get at the transcripts of Rene Desrosier and Jeff Carroll’s testimony. Keep an eye on New to the Site on the Home page.

Enough for now,



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Love at first sight

  1. Debbie Plant says:

    I was informed on Tuesday May 27, 2008 that Fr. Gary Ostler had passed away as a result of the stroke. Nothing has appeared in the paper yet. He was a wonderful man & a true friend and I shall miss him greatly.

  2. RealityChecker says:

    Sylvia did you see this???

    Especially THIS quote taken from the article and from the Chief of the Ottawa Police Service…

    “It’s not my job to protect the interests of the public. It’s my job to protect our members,” he said.

    OH BOY…are we ever in trouble!!! The Police Chief stating publically it’s NOT his job to protect the public – then WHO’s job is it???

  3. Sylvia says:

    Charles Momy is actually President of the Ottawa Police Association. Still, not encouraging to learn that the priority at all times and in all things related to law enfocement is not protection of the interests of the public.

    Plus can’t help but wonder what exactly is it about conflict of interest our police officers just can’t seem to wrap their poor heads around?

  4. Sylvia says:


    You have probably heard by now that Father Gary Ostler died yesterday:

  5. Prima Facie says:

    “Even Bernardo has rights, judge says.” “By Gregory Bonnell.” “The Canadian Press”

    This is the big, black, bold, headline appearing on page “A-11” of the May 30, 2008 home delivery issue of the “Waterloo Region Record”. (Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA.)

    “Gregory Bonnell” writes, “Even a “notorious” rapist and murderer like Paul Bernardo is entitled to a presumption of innocence, an Ontario judge said yesterday as he mulled releasing a jailhouse video interview.”

    “Media outlets were in court seeking the release of the 31-minute video, which features the infamous killer being interviewed by investigators about the 1990 disappearance and death of University of Toronto student Elizabeth Bain.”

    “With Crown lawyers opposed primarily to the use of the recording on the internet, Ontario Superior Court Justice David McCombs took it upon himself to raise the thorny issue of the rights enjoyed by one of Canada’s most reviled inmates.”

    “It’s hard to think of someone more notorious than Paul Bernardo,” “said McCombs, who expressed surprise that the Crown was not opposed to the recording, made last June, being aired on TV.”

    “Even Paul Bernardo is presumed innocent…” “Is it fair to have loops playing on TV saying, “Look at this psychopath trying to wiggle his way out of this”? “That’s what’s going to happen.”

    “Releasing the video could “erode the presumption of innocence that even Paul Bernardo is entitled to,” “he added.”

    YET; let’s look at the Cornwall Public Inquiry and Perry Dunlop.

    It is my opinion, as in this case, in the event the likes of the Ontario Attorney General’s Office, Commissioner Normand Glaude or the other “powers that be”, feel humiliated and exposed, as a result of the reactions of an honest “human being” and ex-Cornwall Police Services “cop”, a.k.a. Perry Dunlop, then, the “honest human being” and ex-Cornwall Police Services “cop”, a.k.a. Perry Dunlop, and his loved one’s, will pay dearly. Dunlop is vilified and becomes a “target” for the vindictive Commissioner Glaude, his agents and others, via among other avenues, the “lapdog, mainstream news media”.

    Additionally, Dunlop is jailed, with “all rights”, apparently under severe scrutiny and suspended.

    MAKE no mistake about it; in my opinion, not even Paul Bernardo, comparatively speaking, would be treated as Perry Dunlop has been treated.

    The “Orders” of Divisional Court, as “pleaded by” and instructed by, Commissioner Normand Glaude, are unprecedented and oppressive, to say the least.

    Dunlop and his loved ones have received a “life sentence”, for the humiliation and exposure, the “ruling elitists” have brought onto themselves.

    I believe THIS IS A TOTAL DISGRACE and blatant, ABUSE OF POWER.

    Perry Dunlop “failed to appear”, nothing more, “FAILED TO APPEAR”.

    “The powers that be” are “on thin ice”, so-to-speak; but, they are “The Powers That Be”; don’t expect any significant cracks, “saving face” is of paramount importance.

    Under the worse case scenario, someone “failing to appear” or even “guilty” as Dunlop is, to these “hyped up” charges, could have been fined $500 for failing to appear and given 30 hours of community service…under the “worse case scenario”. But, the “humiliation and exposure” factor, carries a lot of weight.

    Oh yes, by-the-way; an honest ex-Cornwall Police Services “cop”, a.k.a. Perry Dunlop, who after more than one year of inaction by his superiors or peers (1992 to 1994), bravely acted in the better interests of the citizens of Cornwall, when he “DUTIFULLY” reported allegations to “Children’s Aid et al”, rather than “SURRENDER” to an unwritten, ambiguous, implied, unprofessional and unethical department “protocol”.

    A so-called, “protocol” or “in-house, internal” directive, conspired and constructed by an obvious delinquent, immoral, self-serving, biased, unethical and obviously inept, Cornwall Police Services, as has been clearly and unambiguously displayed, during recent testimony at the “Cornwall Public Inquiry.”

  6. Sylvia says:

    Right on Prima Facie. Here are three more media articles on the subject of protecting Paul Bernardo’s rights:

    Even Bernardo has rights, judge says

    By The Canadian Press

    Fri. May 30 – 4:32 AM

    TORONTO — Even a “notorious” rapist and murderer like Paul Bernardo is entitled to a presumption of innocence, an Ontario judge said Thursday as he mulled releasing a jailhouse video interview in a case with far-reaching implications for the modern media.

    Media outlets were in court seeking the release of the 31-minute video, which features the infamous killer being interviewed by investigators about the 1990 disappearance and death of University of Toronto student Elizabeth Bain.
    With Crown lawyers opposed primarily to the use of the recording on the Internet, Ontario Superior Court Justice David McCombs took it upon himself to raise the thorny issue of the rights enjoyed by one of Canada’s most reviled inmates.

    “It’s hard to think of someone more notorious than Paul Bernardo,” said McCombs, who expressed surprise that the Crown was not opposed to the recording, made last June, being aired on television.

    “Even Paul Bernardo is presumed innocent … Is it fair to have loops playing on TV saying, ’Look at this psychopath trying to wiggle his way out of this’? That’s what’s going to happen.”

    Releasing the video could “erode the presumption of innocence that even Paul Bernardo is entitled to,” he added.

    McCombs also expressed concern that the families of Bernardo’s murder victims or the women he terrorized as the Scarborough Rapist could be traumatized by seeing the interview on television.

    The video was an exhibit at the trial of Robert Baltovich, which ended abruptly last month after the prosecution said it had no reasonable prospect of conviction. Minutes later, a jury found Baltovich not guilty in the 1990 disappearance and death of Bain, his former girlfriend.

    Baltovich’s lawyer, Joanne McLean, said her client supports the release of the video and that she intends to use it as an advocacy tool to open a new investigation into Bain’s disappearance.

    Although Baltovich’s lawyers have pointed the finger at Bernardo, he has denied any involvement and has never been charged in her death.

    “This video is the only video that exists, that we’re aware of, where Mr. Bernardo is asked directly, ’What do you know if anything about Elizabeth Bain’s disappearance?’ ” lawyer Iain MacKinnon, who represents several media outlets, said outside the court.

    “We think there’s an important element of the public interest in seeing how Mr. Bernardo answers those questions.”

    According to transcripts of the video, which was viewed in court in the run-up to Baltovich’s trial, Bernardo — in prison indefinitely for the murders of schoolgirls Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy — is asked whether he killed Bain.

    “That’s a loaded question,” comes the reply. Then later: “The answer to that is no. But the 800-pound gorilla in a room, that’s a life-25 sentence, you know.”

    Crown lawyers said they don’t oppose releasing the video for use on television, granted it’s used for a limited period and the original DVD is destroyed, but do want to keep it off the Internet.
    Judge fears video could threaten Bernardo’s rights

    29 May 2008

    A judge had delayed his ruling regarding the public release of a videotape which shows police interviewing convicted killer Paul Bernardo on the murder of Elizabeth Bain.

    Justice David McCombs said Thursday he wants more information about the technological consequences of releasing the tape before he makes his decision.

    He will hear from lawyers representing both sides again on June 4.

    McCombs said he’s concerned releasing the tape would threaten Bernardo’s rights.

    He said he’s worried that irresponsible editing of the video could lead people to believe that Bernardo is responsible for Bain’s death, even though he is not on trial and is presumed innocent.

    The tape shows police questioning Bernardo about the unsolved disappearance of Bain, a University of Toronto student who vanished in 1990.

    Bernardo, who has never been charged with her death, has denied killing the woman.

    The judge asked the Crown several questions about how easy it would be to distribute, post and even manipulate the video if it were to be posted online.

    The Crown attorney said he supports releasing the video with restrictions. He suggested news outlets be banned from posting the video on their websites so that others wouldn’t be able to post it on file-sharing sites such as YouTube. He also suggested the video be destroyed after it is broadcast on the news.

    Lawyers for several media outlets argued the recording should be made public.

    The video was an exhibit at the trial of Robert Baltovich, who was accused of killing his girlfriend Bain. Baltovich was initially convicted of the murder but the Crown dropped the charges after he appealed the ruling on several grounds.

    Lawyers argued that releasing the video is in the public’s interest because a public inquiry is not being held into what they said was a botched police investigation.

    McCombs said even notorious killers like Bernardo need to have their rights protected.

    The judge also said he feels for Bernardo’s victims and doesn’t think they should have to see the man’s face on TV again.

    With files from The Canadian Press
    Court hears arguments over access to Bernardo tape
    Shannon Kari , Canwest News Service
    Published: Thursday, May 29

    TORONTO – A fear of unrestricted access on the Internet and the privacy rights of Paul Bernardo were raised Thursday by the judge who must decide whether to release an interview conducted with the serial killer last year by Toronto police.

    “These are serious issues,” said Justice David McCombs, who declined to immediately release copies of the interview for broadcast on television news programs, even though the Crown was not opposed. “I must proceed with caution.”

    Canwest Global Communications Corp. and other media outlets are seeking copies of the June, 2007, interview that was connected to the prosecution of Robert Baltovich.

    Bernardo tells police it is a “loaded question” and gives a convoluted denial when asked if he had anything to do with the June 1990 disappearance of Elizabeth Bain.

    Baltovich was acquitted last month at his re-trial into the murder of Bain and his lawyers have pointed to Bernardo as an alternate suspect.

    The fact the Ontario Attorney General has decided not to call an inquiry into the case of Baltovich is even more reason the public should be permitted to view the interview, said lawyer Iain MacKinnon, who is representing the media.

    “This is in the context of Mr. Baltovich’s case and trial. It is important not to lose sight of that,” MacKinnon said.

    He reminded the judge the interview was played in open court last year during pre-trial arguments in the Baltovich prosecution and the Supreme Court of Canada has stressed that there is a presumption in favour of public access to exhibits.

    “We’re talking about Paul Bernardo here,” interjected Judge McCombs. “He is in a special category.”

    While the Crown is not opposed to television news media showing the interview, it wants DVD copies to be destroyed after broadcast and a restriction against posting the material on the Internet.

    The principles set out by the Supreme Court for exhibits played in open court does not mean unlimited access, Crown attorney Shawn Porter said.

    “If you put the video on a website, other people will be able to capture it. Once that’s done, it’s out. It is across the world,” Porter said.

    The possibility that the interview could appear on video-sharing websites such as YouTube is “not a basis to restrict access,” countered MacKinnon.

    He noted that the Internet is increasingly the “medium of choice” for media consumers and the public would be better informed by viewing the full interview online, instead of short clips in a TV news report.

    Jesse Hirsh, a Toronto-based Internet consultant, said in an interview with the National Post that the Crown cannot control online distribution, once it is broadcast on television.

    He also suggested that opposition to posting the interview online, would just increase the public’s desire to see the interview.

    “It’s like waving a red flag. If the interview is simply released, it will be no big deal,” said Hirsh.

    As horrific as Bernardo’s crimes were, McCombs noted in our judicial system, the serial killer has privacy rights.

    “Is it OK to turn him into a punching bag on TV?” the judge asked.

    MacKinnon and Porter both told the judge this was a voluntary interview by Bernardo and his lawyer indicated three times this month he would not be challenging the release of the interview.

    The hearing resumes on June 4 and the judge has asked for more information on how the media might restrict people from downloading the interview if it is posted online.

    © National Post 2008

  7. AbsentObserver says:

    While I almost always agree with Reality Checker, I have to correct something. The quote you’re referring to in the Ottawa Citizen story about the Ottawa police is not from the chief but from the union boss, Charles Momy. He’s the president of the Ottawa Police Association, which basically is the union to which the police officers belong. This man does not participate in any decision making or policy making within the force. In fact, he’s likely not welcome in the building. His job is to protect the interests of the officers from a union point of view, not satisfy the public interest. That’s the case of all unions. There’s no suggestion this man’s position has anything to do with how the police service operates.

    Just wanted to clarify.


  8. RealityChecker says:

    You are right Absent Observer….must have been a bad day…into too much horse manure and I didn’t have my barn boots on.

    It was Momy who made the statement NOT the police chief.

    Sorry ’bout that…not done deliberately!

Leave a Reply