[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. ]
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,