It’s done

Share Button

Perry has now spent 142 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.


Perry’s 47 th birthday is 22 July 2008. Get a card in the mail now to be sure it gets to him on time. Have Masses said for him. Shower him with love, prayers and best wishes. It will be a difficult day – help to take the sting off just a little:

Perry Dunlop c/o OCDC
Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre
2244 Innes Road
Ottawa ON
K1B 4C4

Monetary gifts can be sent to Helen or deposited at a bank. Perry needs money for his canteen supplies. As we all know only too well Perry can’t work, Helen’s on disability and money doesn’t grow on trees


Hearings resume at 1300 hours (1 pm) Monday afternoon, 14 July 2008, with lawyer and Church canon lawyer and “alleged” paedophile Jacques Leduc on the stand.

The roster for the week is posted:

Mr. Jacques Leduc

Motion for an Order Excusing Ronald Wilson – Ronald Wilson through his counsel

Father Bernard Ménard

Monsignor Peter Schonenbach

Ron Wilson doesn’t want to testify. Looks like perhaps it’s another sick slip in the offing? I do believe they’re easy enough to come by :). A bit of a joke really.

Father Bernard Menard is an Oblate priest – sort of from Ottawa. I certainly know of him. He’s the priest-friend of the Brisson family who was involved when they first started Benoit’s sexual abuse at the hands of Father Gilles Deslaurier.

Monsignor Peter Schonenbach – a priest from the Archdiocese of Ottawa – the first Church ‘official’ David Silmser talked to re Father Charles MacDonald.


I had company yesterday. Lead investigator John Spice and commission co-counsel Pierre Dumais were here – at my request. I turned over several cassette tapes which I believe should be entered into evidence. I will leave it at that for now. The long and short is that my last couple of weeks were tied into this – trying to find a cassette player with a dual tape deck so I could both listen to and copy the tapes.

I discovered that cassette players are obsolete! Makes sense – I for one foolishly threw ours out some time back never for a moment thinking I have tapes which I may some day want to play. That day came!

The long and short is that after initially trying to find a friend who has a player which I could borrow, then trying to find a new machine to buy with a dual deck ( no such beast these days), and, and then trying to pick one up at a flea market I finally, on the advice of a vendor at the flea market, picked one up on Monday for the grand total of $6 at a Sally Ann (Salvation Army Thrift Shop).

So, I had opportunity to semi listen to the tapes, but by the time I finally got a machine the first object of the exercise was to get the tapes copied and turned over.

It’s done 🙂

What happens next remains to be seen.


By the sound of it “CIA” is in fine form. I could hear him in the background when Perry called yesterday. I asked what he was saying. The message was: “I got a message from Jesus – it’s for the guards. ‘Start being human – treat prisoners with respect.’ That’s straight from Jesus.

Today his message was “You men here with secrets, keep them to yourselves. Don’t tell your husbands or wives. Keep them to yourselves.” There’s only men in the pod, but, that’s the message.

Perry MAY finally get his few meagre belongings back tomorrow! Let’s hope it comes to pass.


Below a response from Peter Engelmann re transcripts. I haven’t answered yet – busy with other things and had to think about it. I don’t think we can hope for transcripts of French testimony in English – I do think video links could be posted on the Cornwall Public Inquiry website. I don’t know enough about the ins and outs and ups and downs of doing that but they have the recordings with the interpreter’s voice over – I do believe a good computer nerd could sort out the details of putting them online in a flash.

Here’s the email:

Good afternoon. Further to your email to the attention of Mr. Peter Engelmann, I am forwarding his response.

“Dear Ms. MacEachern:

Thank you for your email of June 27, 2008. Since the start of this inquiry, we have had several requests for our hearings to be totally bilingual, i.e. all documents in one language to be translated into the other, all transcripts to be translated and available in both languages, and simultaneous interpretation of our proceedings.

Translation and interpretation are very expensive and in addition translation of documents is time consuming. In an effort to be bilingual, yet cost effective and efficient, we decided at the outset to use simultaneous interpretation only. This allows people who are present and/or following on the webcast the same language choices that counsel have in the hearing room. The Cogeco broadcast can be videotaped and replayed later.

Although the vast majority of the witnesses have testified in English, including some whose mother tongue is French, we have and will continue to have witnesses testifying in French.

I realize this is not ideal for you and some others, but for the reasons set out above we will be continuing the bilingual practice we adopted from the start. Your concerns about the quality of our webcast are noted.

Yours very truly,

Peter Engelmann
Lead Commission Counsel”

Joan Bell

Administrative Assistant

The Cornwall Public Inquiry

So, any thoughts on how we can get access to translations of French testimony? Suggestions can be directed to Mr. Engelmann here

Enough for now,



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to It’s done

  1. AbsentObserver says:

    Anybody taking bets as to how quickly Leduc will be on and off the stand? Word on the street is neither commission counsel nor any of the parties will be allowed to question him about the charges laid against him or his own movement through the justice system. Apparently, it’s going to be about the $32,000 payment and nothing more.

    If that’s true, and that’s all they ask him, I may be done with this inquiry once and for all.

  2. Sylvia says:

    That’s what I figured Absent Observer. The trial was by a federally-appointed judge – beyond the scope of this provincial inquiry. So, Leduc’s testimony will of needs boil down to how he managed to recieve and relay the signed pay-off with the illegal clause to the diocese without ever seeing the illegal clause because he didn’t look at the signed document.

    Will he be asked about his “alleged” visits to Ken Seguin’s? Or who he knew at Classical College? Or who he took his classes in Canon Law with? Or why he decided he should be a canon lawyer? Or what role Larocque played in his decision to a canon lawyer?

    Perhas those are on the verboten list too?

    Anyway, he’ll no doubt be on and off in twinkle of an eye

  3. AbsentObserver says:

    Interestingly enough, I believe the bulk of arguments for Leduc’s right to have standing and funding at the inquiry were almost exclusively related to his own journey through the justice system.

    In fact, when Marie Henein was making her argument for standing, she stated the following:

    “The applicant’s case is, as you know, one of the ones that resulted in charges being laid as a result of the Project Truth investigation. His charges were stayed as a result of delay. It is anticipated that this inquiry will consider the course of many cases as they look at institutional responses, particularly the judicial response, Crown response and police response, and it is anticipated that his will be directly considered. So as narrowly as I can focus on his standing, it’s obviously limited to the areas that are directly relevant to him. The ones that I can identify are police response and investigation, Crown and the judicial resources, and the reason that the cases took as long as they did to proceed. In my respectful submission, granting separate standing to individuals who were directly implicated as a result of Project Truth, whose individual reputations are at stake and who have very distinct and individual experiences with the actual process, would be in my submission of assistance to you as you work through the issues that are raised in the Terms of Reference.”

    Also, when Leduc’s lawyers were making an application for him to receive funding in order to participate in the inquiry, pretty much the sole basis for that application was the fact the several years he spent fighting the charges against drained him financially and the initial costs award he received was reversed on appeal. Again, his lawyers are pointing only to the criminal charges laid against him when arguing his financial status and that’s what the judge considered when making his decision on the funding application, which was ultimately successful.

    These elements of his experiences with the justice system formed a significant part of the basis for his arguments for standing and funding, and it was these elements upon which the commissioner’s ruling on the applications were at least partially based. How is it possible he will not be asked about this?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *