Perry Dunlop is a political prisoner. He has spent 162 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.
I was in Cornwall for the day again yesterday, and will return today and tomorrow. That leaves little time to do things on the site by the time I get home in the evening but I will do the best I can. It’s already the wee hours so will wrap this up as quickly as I can.
Bishop Larocque’s testimony was in English as of noon yesterday. Hallelujah!
And what a day of testimony it was!
Disturbing. Disgusting. Sickening. Revolting. It was all. But,… BUT, it blows the lid smack dab off the oft repeated refrain that no one knew anything and no one covered-up anything and the bishops of Canada are head and shoulders over their U.S. counterparts when it comes to dealing with clerical sex abuse.
It also moves cover-up and wilfully placing children at risk smack dab into the political realm – a sort of cosy and convenient merger of church and state geared in this instance to give “paedophiles” a helping hand and ‘safe’ haven.
I have the transcript posted. The English starts on p. 99. Please please read it. Every single unbelievable word. It’s a must read.
Today I am picking up some of the key documents which were entered into evidence yesterday – will get them scanned and posted when I can.
I will touch on the merger of church and state to protect homosexual paedophiles/ephebophiles/pederasts/homosexual predators or whatever you want to call them. For now I won’t touch on Larocque’s dealings with Father Lucien Lussier. Unfortunatley the Lussier testimony was in French. I will have to got through my notes later and see what I have there.
So, how far did the former bishop of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall go to protect a known clerical molester? Believe it or not, right up to the cabinet of Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s Liberal government!
Truly! In 1983 Larocque sashayed right up to Parliament Hill in Ottawa: he needed a wee bit of a helping hand to harbour a known clerical molester.
Several Acts of Perfect Charity later repeat molester Father Carl Stone was once again snug as a bug in a rug and safely, securely, quietly and ‘ legally’ – if not morally – ensconced in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall.
The Acts of Perfect Charity started when Ed Lumley, a Cornwall area MP who happened to be Trudeau’s Minister of State, apparently opened the doors to the office of the Minister of Immigration, Lloyd Axworthy.
Axworthy kindly provided Stone a “ Minister’s Permit.” The permit would permit Stone to continue working in the Canadian diocese without the presumed need to return to Albany New York and wait the necessary six months to get landed immigrant status.
Stone’s past was known to all.
The permit was to be renewed annually. It was agreed that Bishop Larocque would assume complete responsibility for the priest.
Thanks to Liberals Ed Lumley and Lloyd Axworthy a known molester was able to function with impunity in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall.
True it didn’t last long.
In 1985 word came that the permit would not be renewed.
Whether the change in government had a bearing on the decision or not I have no idea. In September 1984 Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservatives formed the government. Perhaps the Mulroney government wasn’t prepared to chance harbouring a convicted sexual predator? Or perhaps there was ” rumour” of trouble with Father Stone?
Strange enough it just so happens that barely had Larocque intervened again on behalf of the 100 senior citizens who would presumably be left priest-less if Stone was denied the permit than there was word of trouble at the retirement home. Sister Kane at the home got in touch and told Larocque that for the past year – and more so the past six months – Stone had been taking young lads into his room on a regular basis!
So, Larocque spoke to Stone. Stone denied. And Larocque seemed inclined to believe Stone because, after all, what was he to do and who was he to believe when Kane said Stome did and Stone said he didn’t?
It may well have been left at that had not Sister Kane put pen to paper. Evidence.
Within about a week Stone was gone!
Oh yes, first he wrote a letter of resignation. Resignation! He was caught – and, he resigned?!
Not a boo in his letter about the boys. Not an inkling that he had breached his conditions. Off he went again – back to New York!
We heard not a word from Larocque on the Stone saga testimony about manipulation – not once did I hear the bishop say he was manipulated by Stone or that Stone was a master manipulator. Lots of that when he talked about Father Gilles Deslaurier. None when it came to Stone!
Anyway, never forget. No conspiracy. No cover-up. Just a host of Acts of Perfect Charity.
I have questions about the day’s testimony regarding Father Carl Stone’s status in the States where he presumably could have applied for landed immigrant status in the U.S. but would have had to wait for six months to attain it. Could he, a convicted sexual predator, actually have attained landed immigrant status going that route? I’m not so sure. I’m wondering if the Ed Lumley/Lloyd Axworthy intervention was perhaps the only way at that time that Stone could remain in the country period?
One more thing. Seems Stone was on probation when Father Gary Ostler took him in. His probation officer? Ken Seguin.
Also there for the afternoon were Helen and Marlee Dunlop – they are on their way back to Duncan B.C. today. A short whirlwind of a visit. Both are tired.
I beleive it was Perry’s mother’s birthday yesterday. A belated Happy Birthday Heather. We love you and are thinking of you.
I have to add these 🙂
(1) Stone had been in Alexandria-Cornwall in the late 50s and early 60s when Brodeur, in an act of perfect charity, took the preying priest in for the Bishop of Ogdensburg, New York. Stone had been molesting in Ogendsburg and the Bishop of that diocese asked Brodeur to take Stone in and keep from going back to Ogdensberg. There was fear that Stone would be arrested should he surface in the Malone area.
Brodeuer kindly agreed to take the clerical sexual predator in and in so doing put every young boy in the Diocese of Alexandria at risk.
In fairly short order Stone had breached his conditions – he had been back in Ogendensberg in the company of young boys.
Stone was a Montfortian priest. His superiors in the order were aware of Stone’s proclivities. They were in regular contact with Brodeur asking for extensions of Stone’s stay in Alexandria. One such request went out in 1963.
It was not to be. Stone it seems had been been caught again. Brodeur penned a note:
“To my regret, I must inform you that Father Carl Stone has left Alexandria Diocese sometime in August when the Cornwall Police threatened to intervene after his misdemeanour.”
Laorcque added a comment to the effect that Stone’s “good work in our midst” was “highly appreciated.”
(2) Brodeur explained his rationale for taking in the likes of Stone thus:
“To date, in 19 years as a pastor and 17 years as a Bishop, with God’s help,I’ve been instrumental in saving 18 out of 20 unfortunate priests from despair and enabling them to resume their ministry, have influenced me to tolerate the presence of Father Stone in the Diocese.”
(3) Larocque was not concerned that children visiting the retirement home might be at risk: “ I don’t think that he was abusive of children. I think it was teenagers”!
That seems to be a common theme with clergy these days. What, I wonder, is their definition of children?
Enough for now,