Muck raking

Share Button

Well, well, well.  Listen to this. Too too much.  Too much…..

Seems someone put Perry and Helen’s name in for the Order of Canada.  Rick Abell’s name was given as a reference.  Whover from Rideau Hall contacted Rick Abell.  Abell wrote back.  Abell muck-raked Perry and Helen.  He opposed granting the honour. 

I don’t know that what I heard qualifies as slander.  I think it might.  What I do know is that what I just heard I heard makes me sick.  Abell  certainly went well above and beyond the call of duty to give a detailed account as to why he personally felt the Dunlops should NOT be so honoured – everything from his take that a witness had been coached by the Dunlops to falsify a statement to his derogatory comments about their “self promoting” actions.

He must be talking C-8 with regard to Perry coaching a witness to make false statements.  I have yet to see proof of that one, of Perry coaching C-8 to lie. I have seen C-8s statements spun to imply just that, but I have seen no evidence that C-8, himself a molester, said Perry coached him to lie. 

Despicable.  This is truly despicable.

I bet Abell never thought his carefully chosen and thoroughly damning words would ever see the public light of day.  He was obviously comfortable knowing they would circulate around the upper echelons in Canada, yes, but I bet he never for a moment thought that letter would out in the public domain for Perry and Helen and all to see and hear. 

Fascinating to hear this out of a man sporting a large cross on his lapel who just moments earlier said he made a series of errors in an OPP/Project Truth interview, and admited that the OPP officers had actually given him the interview questions in advance of the interview!!!  He doesn’t recall it working that way, but it’s on the record so he agrees that must be the way it happened.  And, well, he thinks that upon reading the transcript now that what with all his pauses and errors throughout the interview he must have gone into it ill-prepared!!!!

There you go.  And that’s that.  Chalk it all up to the fact that for all the preferential consideration profferred him by OPP back then he now claims he didn’t return that consideration by taking the time required to study the questions and prepare his answers.


One more disgusting piece of evidence.  Seems S/Sgt. Garry Derochie came to him at some point regarding David Silmser’s sex abuse allegations against Ken Seguin.  Derochie allegedly told Abell that Dave had been in a homosexual relationship with Seguin and it was consensual!!!

Where did Derochie get that?  From whom?  Who was the author of that spin which was no doubt imparted hither and yon?  The same one who in short order had Dave painted and dismissed as no more than a good for nothing money grubber? 

Perry and Helen, thank your lucky stars every day that you packed your bags and got out of there.

Enough for now



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Muck raking

  1. Reality Checker says:

    Pathetic Sylvia – simply pathetic! As I said with friends like Abel – who needs enemies! Making that letter public shows this creep’s true colours! Yet I have to admit it’s a shock to the system when one really and truly finds out what these so called “friends” do to destroy one’s reputation. Been there – done that – and still to this day I cringe with the reality of how low they went!!!

  2. Reality Checker says:

    Abel went on and on prior to Engleman exposing that letter about maintaining professional boundaries with Dunlop once Dunlop handed over the statement. He said he found it difficult and eluded to it being Perry’s fault’s. I would suggest it wasn’t so much Perry’s fault as it was Abel’s hidden and growing aversion to the Dunlops and the harsh harsh judgement Abel was placing on the Dunlops. The reference for the Order of Canada says it all. Even though they had stopped being friends and they went their separate ways – was that a professional reference as head of the local CAS??? – NO – it was personal – and a personal attack on old friends!!!Nothing to indicate professional boundaries were at play! Hypocrit! Sick! Vindictive and Disgusting!

  3. Sylvia says:

    I have have had the impresion for time now that the “rumour” and “innuendo” to which Glaude et al refer with great frequency was alive and well within the various institutions, and was taken as fact and without question as it was passed along within one institution and then relayed on to the next.

    What personal proof or evidence did all those who labelled David Silmser in a derogatory fashion have at their finger tips to make their allegations? If they didn’t know him, where did it come from? Did it simply boil down to Malcolm told me? Or the Chief told me? Or Jacques told me?

    Ditto this business of Dave in a “consensual” homosexual relationship with his probation officer Ken Seguin. That that should fly by anyone postively floors me, but, …where did it start? Who was the source? Who got the ball rolling? And what was the proof?

    Starnge isn’it, seems police and Crowns needed a multitude of victims per “alleged” molester and a whop of corroborating evidence ++++ to lay sex charges against whomever, but these deprecatory comments about a victim’s character and hence the veracity of his allegations were accepted and bandied about from one to the other without question.

    If Derochie did indeed say that to Abell,why? And who else did he tell? And what proof – if any – does he have? Did Ken Seguin tell him?

    I go the same route on Perry. It is obvious that Perry was being maligned behind his back. Who started the ball rolling there? What proof did anyone have of their deprecatory put downs of Perry? Garry Derochie said? Claude Shaver said? Luc Brunet said? Murray MacDonald said?

    In his interview with the OPP/Project Truth officers Abell apparently said that Perry had been charged and convicted under the Police Services Act. True he added that the conviction was overturned on appeal, but where did he come up with that? How could he possibly have thought Perry was convicted? Where was he?

    An error? From the Executive Director of the CAS who was best friends with Perry and Helen? while Perry was fighting the charges?

    Where did that little “error” spring from? What other “errors” are in that interview?

    This stinks! Stinks!!

  4. Reality Checker says:

    From reading thru the transcripts it wasn’t the OPP/Project Truth that Abel told Perry was charged and convicted under the Police Services Act – it was the Assistant Director at Rideau Hall for the reference for the Order of Canada!!!
    Boy he sure didn’t want the Dunlops to get that honour huh??? Had to lie. How low can a person go???

    Richard Abel – I certainly would never want to be concidered your friend – ever! You are a vindictive – lying – arrogant coward who has the gaul to wear a cross on your lapel – arg!!! I hope you’re doing alot of praying!!!

    ARG!!! ARG!!! and ARG!!!
    It really hits at the heart!

  5. Sylvia says:

    CORRECTION! I just read part of the transcript. It wasn’t the during the OPP interview that Abell said Perry was found guilty of the Police Service Act charges -it was in the letter he sent to Rideau Hall saying in essence that Perry wasn’t fit to receive the Order of Canada, or whatever award he was nominated for!!!!

    Abell told the folks at Rideau Hall that Perry was found guilty!

    I can not believe this.

    He told them Perry was later exonerated, but he told them Perry was initially found guilty!

    Why? Why did Abell put that to paper. It’s not true. WOrse, it conveys the erroneous impression that there must have been enough evidence of wrong-doing for a guilty verdict.

    I understand that Abell and Perry were still very good friends while Perry was fighting those charges. Indeed as I understand it they were great friends until around the time Abell was beaten up by three fellows – in broad daylight – on his own street. Beaten up but good. The trio never found – never charged. After that the relationship apparenlty charged.

    But, that was well after Perry was exonerated, not once but twice, on the Police Serivce Act charges.

    How could he possibly say Perry was found guilty?

    Funny, strangely – as I read through the snippets of what Abell uploaded in that letter I had a sense of deja vu. I felt like I was sitting back in the courtroom at the Leduc trial. Steven Skurka’s spin of facts to a T. (Skurka was Leduc’s high-priced lawyer. That was the trial which ran amok under the watchful eye of Colin McKinnon, the judge who took the bench despite the fact that he was the former lawyer for Cornwall Police Service and Claude Shaver, and had what I would say was a heavy hand in finding a way to have Perry charged under the Police Service Act. McKinnon finlly hd to recuse himself. He called in James Chadwick who fawned all over Leduc when he gave him a stay. The stay was appealed and Leduc was ordered back to trial. At trial #2 Leduc walked claiming his Charter rights to a speedy trial had been violated!!!)

    Yes, Skurka to a T.

    My oh my Abell’s 2001 diatribe denouncing Perry to the upper echelons of the nation sounds mighty like Steven Skurka’s spin. And trust me, it was spin.


  6. Sylvia says:

    We must have been digesting the rot in those transcripts at the same time Reality Checker 🙂

    This one is hard to swallow isn’t it? So low. So terribly terribly low. There is just something about it that takes it down to another low level of gutter.

  7. Sylvia says:

    One more correction. Garry Derochie allegedly said David Silmser’s relationship with Ken Seguin was in part “voluntary” and that Dave “went back to Seguin as a result of a homosexual relationship that grew between them.”


    Which reminds me, something I inadvertently ommitted from my take on Glaude’s final report: “homophobia.” There’s sure to be somthing in there denouncing “homophobia” and presumably looking for ways to eradicate it. The fact that the word homosexual is linked in any way shape or form to the Cornwall sex abuse scandal ensures that the eradication of “homophobia” will be in the final report.

  8. Reality Checker says:

    I have a hard time with this Sylvia because it is all part and parcel of being a WHISTLEBLOWER and how “friends” turn on you in such a vindictive and vile manner. “Friends” you would never ever expect to lower themselves to such gutter tactics. As I said it ends up being quite the shock when the truth is exposed and it’s definitely hard to digest. Yes – it may be hard for us to swallow but what did it do to Perry and Helen? The sense of betrayal can be overpowering and take the wind out of you! Your sense of trust is shattered. As a WHISTLEBLOWER I have “been there”. My heart goes out to Perry and Helen – it hurts.

  9. Sylvia says:

    I am reminded of a little Irish verse that I quite enjoy 🙂

    May those who love us,love us
    and those that don’t love us,
    may God turn their hearts
    and if he doesn’t turn their hearts
    may he turn their ankles
    so we’ll know them by their limping.

Leave a Reply