The bonds grow and grow and grow

Hearings resume at 0930 hours (9: 30 am) this morning, Tuesday 13 January 2009.  Assistant Crown attorney Lorne McConnery will take the stand.

Yes.  Justice Peter Griffiths’ testimony is finished.  Swish bang.  On and off in the twinkle of an eye.

Expect the same for McConnery.

Thank you Premier Dalton McGuinty.  Thank you for allowing us this ever so brief bird’s eye view of the judges and Crowns involved in the Cornwall sex abuse scandal and cover-up who work in or are paid by your AG’s office.  A few more days a-piece would have been nicer and more in keeping with getting to the truth and lifting the fog, but we will settle with your decision of a few hours a-piece.  What choice do we have?

I am as usual running behind 🙁   I did an all nighter the night before last.  By the time things wrapped up late afternoon I took care of supper, caught up on the latest news on that dear little  Caylee, and then I crashed!!!

So here I am.  I posted the transcript.  Please do read it when you get a moment.  It is just becoming increasingly clear with each passing witness that the allegations of David Silmser and Perry Dunlop and everyone connected to them didn’t have a hope.  Not a hope.  They and their allegations were scoffed at, ridiculed, belittled, mocked, dismissed, and/or minimized from day one.  Perry and Dave and others became the subject of outright character assassination.

After all we have heard how anyone can claim that the allegations of conspiracy and cover-up were ever taken seriously enough to investigate thoroughly is now well beyond the scope of my imagination.

Anyway, a few quick observations on Peter Griffiths and his testimony

(1)  Peter Griffiths is Justice Normand Glaude’s immediate superior.

Although Glaude was appointed to the bench in 1990 and Griffiths in 1998, Griffiths has climbed on up the judicial ladder past Glaude.  Griffiths is now Associate Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice.  The second in command.  In as much as any judge seems to answer to anyone, Glaude answers to Griffiths.

In this “independent” and “impartial” inquiry the pay cheques for both men emanate from the office of the Attorney General.  The AGs office of course has standing at the inquiry because it is implicated in the Cornwall scandal and cover-up.  And of course it was the office of the AG which officially commissioned the inquiry, appointed Justice Normand Glaude as commissioner with claims he had no connections to Cornwall, and crafted what I refer to as the flawed mandate.

(2)  There has been much talk of Malcolm MacDonald’s 1995 absolute discharge.  That was granted by Justice Brian W. Lennox. 

Lennox moved right to the top of the Ontario judicial ladder.  He was made Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice in May 1997.  He left that position in May 2007, the same year that Peter Griffiths was appointed Associate Chief Justice.

(3)  Griffiths started out his examination in chief as ever the gentleman.  Polite.  Gracious.

That changed. 

Look at this.  I nearly fell of my chair when I heard this exchange.

Dallas Lee (Victims Group)  was asking Griffiths about what is being referred to as the Pelletier memo, an 02 April 2007  memo in which  L’Original Crown attorney Robert Pelletier was giving Griffiths an update on Father Charles MacDonald’s case

I will have to dig that out and get it posted.  Quite intriguing it is. A glimpse at the mind set of those responsible for the outcome of the allegations of a ring and cover-up.

Anyway, Lee asked Griffiths about Pelletier’s use of the word “crusade” in relation to Perry Dunlop.  Look at the exchange, and Griffith’s sarcastic and very rude response:

MR. LEE: The next paragraph, we have Mr. Dunlop was exonerated by the Police Services Act court and has since begun a crusade aimed at exposing what he perceived to be a conspiracy in Cornwall. Do you see that, sir?

MR. JUSTICE GRIFFITHS: Yes.

MR. LEE: And crusade is rather strong wording, wouldn’t you say?

MR. JUSTICE GRIFFITHS: I don’t think he was writing this to you.

MR. LEE: To?

MR. JUSTICE GRIFFITHS: You.

Isn’t that disgusting?  Disgusting!  This is our Associate Chief Justice. 

Dallas Lee replied  “No, I don’t think he was.”  True enough.  I would guess that at that time Pelletier’s disparaging dart was for Griffith’s eyes only. 

(4)  Griffiths was aware that Pelletier and Murray MacDonald were close friends and had been for some time. 

(5) That bonds in that One Big Happy Family grow and grow and grow. 

Turns out Griffiths is indeed friends with both Murray MacDonald and Pelletier.

It seems that perhaps his friendship with Murray MacDonald has grown over the years.  When asked by Dallas Lee if he socialized with Murray Griffiths response was, witness the following, slightly cautious and evasive:

MR. LEE: What was your relationship with Mr. MacDonald? Anything other than professional — did you socialize at all?

MR. JUSTICE GRIFFITHS: At this time, I think I’d been to his home once for dinner. I had never met him before coming to Ottawa in 1993 and he was one of nine Crowns that worked for me; Crown Attorneys as opposed to assistants.

I think the “at this time” refers to the 1997 time frame.  I would guess Grifith’s response menas that there were other dinners?

As for Pelletier, they too are friends.  Griffiths obviously holds him in high esteem and the pair became occasional skiing buddies and:

MR. LEE: What about Mr. Pelletier and yourself? Were you friends; did you socialize?

MR. JUSTICE GRIFFITHS: Yes, although I don’t know whether that was before or after this. We went skiing a few times together and socialized to that extent.

Were we friends? Yes, he replaced me on an interim basis on two occasions and that was at my request. I had sufficient confidence in his judgment and his ability that I thought that he would be the one that should replace me.

(6)  The same people who were involved in the initial David Silmser allegations against Father Charles MacDonald and subsequent “investigations” of conspiracy were involved directly or indirectly from one “investigation” to the next.

(7)  Murray MacDonald seems to be ensconced in a bubble.  We have seen it in the past every time his name arose, and we see it now.   Despite the fact that Murray was implicated in some fashion in allegations of cover-up he was, it seems, never treated as a suspect by anyone, be it Crown, judge or police officer.

(8)  Robert Pelletier’s close friendship with Cornwall Crown Murray MacDonald was presented as no big deal.  I get the impression that no one seemed to see it as problematic and that it was Pelletier who eventually decided to step down from Project Truth cases because of it.

Despite that known conflict and Pelletier’s animus toward Perry as shown in his April 1997 memo,  Griffiths allowed Pelletier to carry on with the Perry Dunlop death threats “investigation.”

(9)  A reminder that police have done nothing, absolutley nothing, about John MacDonald’s complaints of obstruction of justice against Griffiths, Pelletier and Murray MacDonald. 

****

I am having some problems with my Real Player.  Will have to address that or I can’t follow the testimony.  Must get at that.  Times like this I wish I were a computer geek 🙂

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)