A sequel to yesterday’s blog: “Can’t be done.”
Sometimes it’s good to take a wee look back 🙂
What a difference six months makes 🙂
A little reminder below from the Toronto Star. Courtesy of CP :).
Overlook the let’s blame it all on Perry and Ron Leroux recanted. Take a good close look at Attorney General Chris Bentley’s words (highlighted in red).
And note the story ran 01 April 2008.
April Fool’s Day :).
Commissioner cites former officer’s refusal to testify as one reason for delay of costly hearings
Apr 01, 2008 04:41 PM
THE CANADIAN PRESS
CORNWALL, Ont. – A costly and protracted public inquiry into how the justice system and other institutions responded to sexual abuse allegations in eastern Ontario has been extended into the fall, a move the commissioner blames in part on former police officer Perry Dunlop’s refusal to testify.
Struck three years ago and with a running tab of some $23 million, the Cornwall public inquiry began making national headlines again in January when Dunlop, a former cop in Cornwall, Ont., vowed to defy a court order compelling his testimony.
Making good on his promise, Dunlop – whose off-hours investigation in 1993 led to explosive claims of a widespread pedophile ring – is serving a six-month sentence in an Ottawa jail, convicted of contempt for refusing to tell his story.
The inquiry was scheduled to conclude witness testimony in July.
On Monday, Commissioner Normand Glaude extended the probe by three months. With a summer break factored in, the inquiry will be hearing witness testimony into the fall.
“There have been a number of unexpected occurrences in the last few months,” Glaude said in a statement. “These include the refusal of Perry Dunlop to testify and subsequent contempt of court proceedings.”
The commissioner also cited winter storms, witness illnesses, and an Ontario Court of Appeal ruling on the inquiry’s mandate as having delayed progress.
“These are some of the reasons that have resulted in a need to extend our hearing date beyond July.”
Ontario Attorney General Chris Bentley said Tuesday that he wasn’t concerned Glaude felt the inquiry would have to run longer than planned.
“I know they’re proceeding as expeditiously as they can. These things sometimes take a while,” said Bentley.
“We need to hear all the evidence and make sure the commissioner has the time to prepare the report.”
Bentley also said the escalating cost of the public inquiry in Cornwall was not something the government could control, nor should it.
“Once you call the inquiry, you need to let it run its course, and the commissioner is in control of the process,” he said.
“The commissioner makes sure it proceeds in the way that he decides that it should. I’m looking forward to the report and to the recommendations that are made.”
In January, the Appeal Court ruled Glaude exceeded his jurisdiction when he tried to hear testimony from a witness who was allegedly raped by two teens in 1993. Glaude indicated on Monday that the commission would not appeal that decision.
Dunlop’s refusal to testify means the commission is now considering “alternate methods of bringing forward evidence related to Mr. Dunlop,” Glaude said.
That includes an overview of documentary evidence related to Dunlop, a draft of which has been circulated to the various parties at the inquiry.
“Should Mr. Dunlop decide to return to the inquiry to testify he is welcome to do so,” Glaude said.
“His oral testimony would be a valuable elaboration and enhancement of the documentary record of evidence given by others.”
The judges who handed Dunlop a six-month jail sentence also ruled that the married father of three, who now lives in Duncan, B.C., can “vacate” his contempt conviction and be released if he agrees to testify.
Dunlop’s investigation of sex abuse allegations exploded onto the national stage in the 1990s after local resident Ron Leroux claimed he’d seen bizarre sex rituals involving powerful, robe-clad community leaders and young boys.
In a 1996 affidavit, Leroux claimed the pedophile ring operated for decades, beginning in the 1960s.
A police investigation dubbed Project Truth laid some 115 charges against 15 men but failed to uncover any evidence of a ring.
Ultimately, only one person was convicted. Four died before their cases came to trial, four were acquitted, four had the charges against them withdrawn, and two had the charges against them stayed over delays.
Testifying before the inquiry last summer, Leroux admitted he’d made up his story.
What happened Mr. Bentley? Why the 180 degree turn about?
Simply more broken promises ?
Too many crumbs falling under the table?
Or a little bit of fun – a little April Fool’s Day prank?
Joke or no the “alleged” paedophiles of Cornwall and those who covered-up on their behalf are having a hoot of a laugh. Then they’ll all sleep tight. Snug as bugs in their wee Charter rugs.
Enough for now
Sylvia
prima facie asks a very good question in another posting….is an ODE going to be submitted for Dunlop??? Was his Will State ever entered into evidence?
Has that been done???
Perry served his time and they really can’t touch him any more. No means No coming from Perry. The whole thing is directed at Perry so they might as well shut it down now that he is out of the picture and stop these little crumbs from getting out.
Is that a cross or crusifix on Abel’s lapel??? It’s quite large – can anyone see what it is?
Reality Checker: There was going to be an ODE. Talk of it some time back. Haven’t hear anything of it for some time.
As for his Will State, it must have been entered itno evidence. It has been referenced and quoted from number of times. (And quoting from it right this minute.)
As for crucifix – I believe it’s a large cross, not a crucifix on his lapel. I see no corpus (body of Christ) on the cross which is what would make it a crucifix.
And true enough Myomy, now that Perry is out of jail, what better way to limit the number of AG/OPP crumbs falling under the table than shut the whole ruse down prematurely?
Excuse my ignorance – what’s the significance of wearing a large cross on the lapel? Is that a K of C thingy???
Just curious.
It’ll Take as Long as It Takes
BY TERRI SAUNDERS
STANDARD-FREEHOLDER
CORNWALL
Saturday, June 18, 2005
However long it takes.
That’s the timeline Justice Normand Glaude has set for the public inquiry into Project Truth.
During his first visit to Cornwall on Friday, the Sudbury-based judge said he’s not going to rush the process when it comes to investigating institutional response to decades of sexual abuse of children in the city and surrounding area.
“(It) will take time,” said Glaude. “While I’m hurrying, I’m not going to cut any corners. This is too important.”
Glaude held the first of what will likely be a series of media briefings leading up the inquiry which he hopes will get under way after Christmas.
“I would be very disappointed if we did not have the hearings for standing done this fall,” said the judge, referring to presentations from groups which want to be heard at the inquiry.
“Optimistically, very optimistically, public hearings (will begin) I would say early in the new year.”
The prospect that the inquiry could begin within a year was good news to some members of the public who turned out to watch the judge’s press conference via close-circuit television in an adjoining room at a city hotel.
“Our group now wants to get into the process, because there really hasn’t been any process, it’s been very disorganized, a lot of speculation,” said Paul Scott, a spokesperson with Citizens for Community Renewal. “We are looking forward to this process beginning and we are looking forward to bringing our concerns to the inquiry.”
A few feet away, another group of citizens was singing a different tune.
Members of the Red Flag Committee, an ad hoc group of the Coalition for Action, said Glaude’s decision not to comment on his familial relationship to two sexual abuse victims, other than to say he’s unsure how he’s related to them, smacks of conspiracy.
“It’s the last chapter of the coverup,” said Carson Chisholm, a spokesperson for the group.
“The fix is in.”
No. Not a KOC thing.
I have been trying to see and think perhaos there is something at the cross-bar of the cross. Perhaps a dove? Some Catholics involved in various “renewal” movement within the Church wear something along that line. I know of similar crosses worn by Catholics who are involved in the Charimatic Renwal, and also by Catholics involved in COR and Cursillo movements in some dioceses. Usually however those crosses are much smaller and on a neck chain.
A cross like that is not at all a “Catholic” thing per se. It’s more a personal thing.
A crucifix on the other had is definitely Catholic. To wear one is a personal choice, but it is very much a part of Roman Catholic tradition and belief.
Thanks for the clarification Sylvia – I’m not Catholic and admit to my ignorance on some things Catholic 🙂
Personally, this ‘GONG SHOW” has gone on long enough! Another week of October, the months of November and December and ‘viola’ we have a closure to this sham of an ‘Inquiry’
Sylvia, you have hit the nail smack dab on the head regarding your many opinions in your last few posts..I, for one agree that the ‘fix is in’….a rush to the finish line, blah, blah and blah… the same old rhetoric being hashed over time and time again. What remains are left over is that Perry Dunlop is and will remain the scapegoat for these alleged accusations against a clan/ring of paedophiles operating in the Cornwall area in the 60’s and 70’s. Absolutely nothing will change with that respect.
Perry Dunlop was so right when he declared that the mandate to this Inquiry was way off kilter and that Glaude be positioned as Commissioner knowing the familial ties he had to Cornwall – conflict of interest, etc. Perry is not stupid and he fought this particular reasoning right up front and center to the point, I think, agitated the Commissioner into the action of defense, thus prompting a virtual, personal vendetta against the very person who had guts enough to stand up for his beliefs by saying “I have no faith in the justice system” regarding the so-called investigations of historical sexual abuse against childrn.
What of the victims? Those, who bared their souls to the many scrutinizing lawyers who literally picked them apart on the inquiry stand? What of the many alleged abusers who are so-called free (unless they are dead:) still in positions where they can still molest innocent victims?
The only outcome I can see is 40 million dollars of Ontario’s taxpayer’s dollars is really all for naught….institutions screwed up, OPP covered up, the Diocesece TRIED to cover up and a good man went to jail for his duty to report a criminal activity against a young male person who was alledgedly abused by not one, but two, prominent people.
I guess the ‘proof is in the pudding’ as they say.
Would dearly love to hear another so-called ‘explosive’ testimony from at least one of the next few remaining whitnesses in the next couple of months. Need a ‘bombshell’ by someone! But, then again, witnesses are coached on what to say and what not say, aren’t they?????
This has been disgusting right from the git’ go and will be disgusting when this 3rd rate movie ends!