Another read and weep

Share Button

Hearings are about to resume (2:00 pm, Thursday, 04 December 2008)

A few notes on retired OPP Detective Inspector Pat Hall’s testimony of the morning:

(1)  “Alleged” molester Harvey Latour attempted to commit suicide.  This on the same day he along with another raft of suspects were scheduled to be charged sort of en masse.  The decision to charge en masse and on that date, 09 July 1998,  was apparently made by Detective Inspector Tim Smith and Crown attorney Robert Pelletier.

“Alleged” sex abuse victim Robert Sheets also attempted suicide.

In both instances Pat Hall and/or other Project Truth officers intervened in some fashion.

(2)  Of the raft of charges laid 09 July 1998 none were against men named in the Dunlop-Fantino materials.  The OPP Project Truth was presumably struck to address the allegations contained in the latter.

Two “alleged” molesters, ex-priest Richard Hickerson and former probation officer Nelson Barque,  who were referenced in the Dunlop-Fantino materials, committed suicide before charges were laid. 

Apparently there were reports that Barque was out in the brush with a gun.  Shortly thereafter Barque was dead.

(3)  There was considerable testimony regarding the fact that by 31 July 1998 the Project Truth team had not received the entire contents of the Dunlop-Fantino materials, nor had the team received documents which Perry gave to the Attorney General, Solicitor General and OCCPS in April 1997. 

 Perry turned over the materials to Hall and asked that Hall sign a receipt.  That was done.

Hall seems quite miffed that a copy of that receipt later showed up in the Ottawa Sun.  I for one think the concerned public had a right to know.  Hall on the other hand is upset that this publicity gave Garry Guzzo material to run with, and stoked the fires of those who alleged the office of the Attorney General was in on the cover-up.

Seems Hall has been trying for years to get an answer from anyone in the AG’s office as to why those materials were not forwarded.  To date no response of any satisfaction has been forthcoming.

I am still uncertain which materials were absent the Dunlop-Fantino materials which were presumably forwarded in tact to the probe.  There is no doubt however that all in all the materials were missing from both the Dunlop-Fantino materials and the materials in the possession  of the AG which would have aided Hall and his colleagues in their probe.  As much as Hall initially seemed to downplay the import of the missing documents even he eventually admitted he could have used them, particularly all the documents related to Perry’s charges under the Police Services Act.  I do believe the latter were part of the Dunlop-Fantino materials.

(The materials which were given to the AG’s office in April 1997 contained some statements which had not yet been obtained by Perry when he packed things off to Julian Fantino.)

(4)  Seems Marcel Lalonde was a lector at Father Charlie’s church.  Which church I am unsure, but nonetheless he was a lector. 

What a disgrace. A sacrilege!

That aside, there is the ongoing issue of connecting the dots, and seems that yet again no dots were connected when it came to Lalonde and Charlie or Lalonde and anyone else. 

I believe it was around this point that Justice Glaude weighed in.  Credit where credit is due.  Glaude did a great job of trying to find out why proper questions were not put to Lalonde: ditto to a Lalonde victim.

The whole notion that allegations of a paedophile ring were ever properly investigated by anyone has long gone out the window, and with it allegations that members of the ring were well-situated to cover-up sex abuse allegations..

(5) There is another round of testimony related to Perry’s failure to sign a document for Pat Hall agreeing that he, Perry, had disclosed all documents pertaining to criminal matters to Project Truth.

According to Hall Perry initially agreed to sign the documents but in the space of 35 minutes had changed his mind. I believe the testimony is that Perry told Hall he had received legal advice and was advised not to sign. 

I really know nothing about this but it certainly upset Hall to no end.  All I can say is that if a lawyer tells a client not to sign something what’s a client to do?  I would guess that every member of the gathered throng would be incensed with their clients if they failed to heed legal advice? 

I am uncertain of the date but think it was October 1998? 

(6) The Crown brief on sex abuse allegations against former Crown attorney Malcolm MacDonald was submitted to the Crown July 1998.  The Crown’s response came back in March 1999.  Preliminary hearings were set for 2000.

These unbelievable delays in investigations and Crown decisions seemed to be the order of the day. 

Is it any wonder suspect molesters were dying left right and centre and never made it to trial?

(7)  A few testy exchanges this morning.  I thought Hall had settled down considerably yesterday.  He seems to be a little wound-up again today. 

(8) I have posted  22 December 2008: Crown attorney Robert Pelletier letter to Det. Sgt. Pat Hall:  “Allegations of Conspiracy to Commit Murder and Death Threats Against Cst. Perry Dunlop and Family.”

Another read and weep document 🙁

Pelletier concludes that reasonable and probable grounds do not exist to lay charges, and that if they did “it would presently be contrary to the public interest to pursue this matter.”

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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