Another bombshell!

Share Button

[PLEASE NOTE: I have just been told that there was in the past year or so a disclaimer on the Price website saying the Pat Hall referenced by them is not the same Pat Hall.  I will have to check this out.  Until I hear otherwise, please read the following with that in mind.] 

[NOTE AGAIN:  Please read attached clarifying blog posted by David Price. ] 

 ****

Another bombshell!

Pay Hall was himself investigated by the SIU on allegations of sex abuse.

Chaos in the Weave Shed!!

The allegations of Dave and Shelley Price against several prominent men – – Bishop Larocque included – have scarce been touched throughout these prolonged hearings. 

As we well know the issue of veracity victim/”alleged” victim allegations is inconsequential to Glaude’s inquiry because it’s beyond the scope of the mandate.   Why were the Price allegations then not addressed? 

The sex abuse allegations against Pat Hall were disclosed at a later date, but they certainly were disclosed. 

Surely that is relevant to the institutional response?  Not as to the truth of the Price allegations, but just as to the fact that Hall was the subject of such allegations, and the object of an SIU investigation?

I am uncertain offhand but believe the SIU investigation was carried on in the mid 2000s – perhaps around 2003? 

Anyway, according to one of the excited members of the gathered throng who leaped to their feet to object to this line of questioning the SIU concluded the allegations against Hall were all a case of mistaken identity. 

Is that fact?  I don’t know.  I’d like to see the report. 

A flustered John Callaghan also leaped to his feet to say there were issues of credibility with the Prices.

Attacking the credibility of a witness is nothing new for Callaghan, but why would he, a lawyer for the Cornwall police, feel the need to defend Pat Hall?  Intriguing matter, is it not?  That aside, what difference does witness credibility make at Glaude’s inquiry?  What grounds is that to exclude testimony.  After all, as far as CPS was concerned David Silmser wasn’t credible either, and we’ve heard no lack of testimony regarding Dave and his allegations. Right?

The long and short, good on Frank Horn for at least getting a matter of public interest on the record. He was alas unable to argue why he should continue to pursue that line of questioning.  And that was the end of that.

A final point here.  Callaghan said something about Shelley Price not coming forward to address her allegations in a credible way.  My recollection is that the Price allegations were originally taken to police in the late 90s.  They asked that Perry Dunlop be the investigating officer.  Request denied.  They refused to deal with any other CPS officer.  Shelley’s allegations make clear why that was the case.  Callaghan I am sure is well aware of the circumstances.

Enough for now,

Sylvia,

([email protected])

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Another bombshell!

  1. David Price says:

    Shelley and I have been married for over 30 years.
    We are both stone cold sober.
    We do do not use alcohol, drugs or pharmaceuticals.
    We have not been diagnosed with any mental maladies.
    We have no criminal records.
    We are not seeking any financial compensation.
    We do real work to pay the bills.
    We believe in truth and justice.
    We have been speaking out against the Cornwall Clan for over 30 years, first documented by MPP Cleary in the mid 70’s.
    Our childrens lives have been threatened. (documented)
    We have been threaten by Police Officers. (documented)
    Our story remains the same.
    This is an accurate description of our lives.
    Credible? Not according to Callahan.

    Note that it was in the mid 70’s when we first went to MPP John Cleary about the Clan and it was already old news to him.
    I will clarify a few issues.
    The disclaimer was placed on our web site after the SIU cleared their Pat Hall.
    Apparently he was never in Cornwall or Stormont County prior to Project Truth.
    During the SIU interviews they did not seem to be interested in a physical description, nor did they show us pictures.
    We still absolutely stand by our story.
    The perps name is Pat Hall.
    He was known to other local Police Officers (1975) by that name.
    He had a good friend who called him undercover Pat, Pat the cop.
    He was slim about 5’6″ – 5’7″.
    Slight reddish hair.
    Born in late 40’s or early 50’s.
    He was involved in the Clan boat.
    He liked wearing black.
    If this is not the Project Truth Pat Hall then so be it.
    Pat Hall the perp is still out there.
    The SIU only wanted to clear their Pat Hall, not help us find ours.
    Although information is sketchy I have reason to believe that the SIU had requested the RCMP investigate us for fraud. This is the institutional response to allegations.
    Nothing ever came of it.
    We were never interviewed by the RCMP however we suspect our phone was tapped and we were subject
    to surveillance around that time.
    Of course we never did trust the SIU and then came the infamous Ombudsman report on the SIU.
    After over 30 years of disgust we are not involved in any civil law suits and have no intention of seeking any justice or compensation.
    The disturbing educational revelations provided by these alleged professional investigators is more than we ever hoped for.

  2. prima facie says:

    To: David Price:
    Excellent, very excellent. Very, very excellent for your prompt and voluntary input on Sylvia’s website.

  3. Sylvia says:

    Thank you David. Thank you for clarifying.

    You went to John Cleary about the “clan” back in the 70s? Twenty years before Perry happened on the scene? Twenty years before Ron Leroux happened on the scene?

    And what have we heard of that at Glaude’s inquiry? Nothing!

    Does anyone out there know a Pat Hall who meets David’s description?

  4. David Price says:

    I need to put this all in context.
    As some may wonder where we came from.
    Shelley and I were not willing or voluntary participants in any Clan activity.
    I was raised in Cornwall and Long Sault.
    I hung out with Raymond Latour (1974 – 1977), Harveys son.
    I worked on occasion for Harvey at the restaurant and catering.
    Harvey had a huge Knights of Columbus support for his business.
    Yes Harvey had a tatoo.
    I have been on the Clan Boat.
    My father inlaw was inner circle with Malcolm McDonald and Dr. Peachey.
    Dr. Peachey was my doctor.
    My father inlaw was a Fireman and Correctional Officer.
    At some point he started taking his kids to Father Charlies Parish.
    Shelley’s family lived in Glenview Heights which was surely a festering point for the Cornwall Clan.
    This is just an idea of where we have been with this.
    This Inquiry had so much potential to do good but has missed the mark so badly.
    As horrible and painful as the Cornwall story is it is also a fascinating look at the near total moral collapse of a society.
    This is what needs to be addressed.
    Nadeau’s website may be as close as we ever get to the truth.

  5. RealityChecker says:

    I had thought there was “something” about Pat Hall but couldn’t put my finger on it. Now I’ve fingered it!!!

    I came across Shelley and David Price’s website quite awhile ago and the You Tube video they had taken about the “stalking” they felt they were being subjected to…it raised a number of questions for me and I did subtly started to ask various people questions about the Prices – no one seemed to know anything in too much detail about the Prices. I had wanted to contact the Prices and tell them it was the cops doing the surveillance and to me it was so darned obvious!!! (For my own reasons-I didn’t make contact)Regardless of the dishing the Prices received on the comments of the You Tube video I BELIEVED every word they said and certainly understood where they were coming from and WHY they found it necessary to video the “strange occurances” around their residence out in BC.

    I read Shelly’s “history”…..Mr. & Mrs. Price….I BELIEVE YOU!!!

    Who is “undercover Pat???”

    Hmmmm……

  6. RealityChecker says:

    As I once told an RCMP Inteligence officer….there’s a difference between being “watched” and being “WATCHED AND UNDER SURVEILANCE”

    I was told I would never know if I was under surveillance by the RCMP.

    B-S!!!

    Just like the Prices….YOU KNOW WHEN YOU ARE UNDER SURVEILLANCE!!!
    They couldn’t make it anymore obvious especially if you are one with a story to tell that the powers to be DON’T want told!

    You end up thinking you are going crazy by the strange and unexplainable occurances!!! And if you start talking about and videoing the strange occurances when people don’t know the history or the background of the story – well – people think you should be locked up in some psych ward!!!

    Been there – done that!!!

  7. prima facie says:

    MY OPINION:

    Although I am not a big Frank Horn fan, in fact,……well, I’ll leave that for another time, my point here is, at one point Mr. Horn suggested that “in-the-time”, 1990’s, Dunlop could have been charged if there were reasonable and probable cause to charge him, but wasn’t and/or could have been forced to comply with a Court Order, but wasn’t.

    Unfortunately, in an obviously very prejudiced and biased fashion, Commissioner Glaude arrogantly and condescendingly, engaged in his own theatrics, obviously to the pleasure and amusement of the watching, “mal-practice, liability insurance carrier, defense lawyers” and members of “CCR”.

    Commissioner Glaude smiled, snickered and quietly commented that Mr. Dunlop certainly hasn’t followed some court orders, so why would he have then. Commissioner Glaude was obviously referring to his questionable but successful attempts, via ex-parte application, to secure Dunlop’s presence at the “Glaude Inquiry” in the Fall of 2007 and subsequently at Divisional Court. (anyone out there understand “ex-parte”, especially via a “Justice of the Peace”? In my opinion and in this case, this was a disgusting misuse and possible “abuse” of the “process” and “law”.

    Despite Commissioner Glaudes obvious and may I suggest justified impatience with Frank Horn, Glaude’s antics evoked loud laughter from the defense lawyers, members of “CCR” and others present.

    Unfortunately Commissioner Glaude neglected to state, that failure to comply with a court order can lead to additional charges and an arrest. Additionally, despite the “joyous” time Commissioner Glaude and the others had yesterday, at Dunlop’s expense, Commissioner Glaude failed to mention, that his actions led to the jailing of Dunlop.

    So, “in-the-time”, if Dunlop had committed criminal offences or other similar, he should have been charged and prosecuted. Why was he not? Isn’t it easy to point fingers at Dunlop fifteen years later” Isn’t it easy to influence a listening public who are genuinely naïve and ignorant of legal procedure, laws, “process”, etc?

    I have tried to understand Commissioner Glaude and offer him “goodwill”; however, his obvious bias is too much. I believe this is very, very serious.

  8. prof says:

    reality checker can you point me to the price’s web site and the utube site. I can not seem to find them. Thanks. Prof

Leave a Reply

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