Royal run-around

Share Button

I have a new and functional Google search engine on the website.  Unfortunately it’s a little larger than the last one – I think it may cause problems for Firefox and Mac users.  I will leave it for now only because the search engine is now the only way to navigate the site to dig out previously posted information.  If anyone has a script which allows the option to search theinquiry.ca or the World Wide Web and produces a smaller box please email.  It would be greatly appreciated.

****

Note the Freeholder is inviting comments.  Those who wish to have a say can give it a shot:

Today and Thursday, reporter Trevor Pritchard will be taking your phone calls between noon and 2 p. m.

Your comments will appear in Friday’s newspaper or on our website at www.standard-freeholder.com. To phone in, call 613-933-3160, ext. 251.  You can also send a short e-mail to tpritchard@standard-freeholder.com.  Names and phone numbers must accompany all submissions. Phone numbers will not be published.

****

As promised a few days ago, a few more bits and pieces about Malcolm MacDonald and, to quote Crown Curt Flanagan, his “exemplary” background.

I am told that in the early 70s it was a daily joke at the Cornwall courthouse:  would the Crown attorney – Malcolm MacDonald – show?

I am also told that  when Judge Fitzpatrick was on the bench he would work himself into a rage demanding that Malcolm be brought in, and demanding to know where Malcolm was, and/or sending out messengers to track down the Crown.

It was common knowledge in those days that Malcolm was often “under the influence.”

One can only wonder where Curt Flanagan got his information regarding Malcolm MacDonald, –  the things that got Malcolm an absolute discharge after his plea of guilty, particularly that part that Flanagan mentioned about Malcolm’s “exemplary” background.

****

Keep the victims and their families in your prayers.  This is proving to be a difficult time.

****

Here is a chronology of John MacDonald’s quest for justice.  I have excluded the interactions related to the “scrap” of paper handed to John which was in fact a CPIC report containing confidential information regarding an Cornwall man.  There has been no follow-up on that.  If CPS conducted any sort of internal investigation to wrap a knuckle or two, or if a CPS apology was ever offered  the individual whose private and confidential information was handed to John, John was never, to my knowledge, advised. To catch the details on that part of the saga read the entire saga.

So, the chronology stripped to the bare bones:

(1) Saturday 20 January 2007

John MacDonald attends the Cornwall police station and advises Mr. Nelson Ayotte, a member of the Cornwall police, that he wanted Cornwall Crown attorney Murray MacDonald and Justice Robert Pelletier and Peter Griffiths charges with obstruction of justice.

(2) 26 February 2007

According to John, CPS Sgt. Shawn White advised that John should sue the trio rather than pursue obstruction of justice charges against them.

(3) 05 January 2007

 John files a formal complaint against MacDonald, Pelletier and Griffiths

(4) May 2007

John MacDonald speaks to Deputy Chief of Police Danny Aikman

(5)  17 May 2007:

John MacDonald speaks to Chief of Police Daniel Parkinson.

(6) 13 October 2007:

Staff Sgt. Bob Burnie contacts John MacDonald’s sister alleging he, Burnie, has been unsuccessfully trying to contact John for the past month.

(7)  30 October 2007:

John MacDonald emails Cornwall Chief of Police Dan Parkinson after he, John, was told by Sergeant Bob Burnie that John’s complaint falls within the guidelines of the Cornwall Public Inquiry and it will therefore be left until the inquiry “runs its course.”

From: john macdonald

Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 8:55 PM

To: [various recipients]

Subject: Obstruction of Justice Complaint

Chief Dan Parkinson:

My name is John Mac Donald, we have spoke by phone concerning a complaint that I filed concerning Obstruction of Justice charges against Crown Attorney Murray MacDonald, Judge Robert Pelltier and Judge Peter Griffiths.

Recently, 17 days ago to be exact, I was contacted by my sister, who called me to let me know that Sergant Bob Burnie had phoned her to let her know that he had been looking for me. He had mentioned to her that he had been searching for me for about the last month. I found this rather odd, since I had given you both my cell number and my home phone number, both of which you called me back on. These numbers were also passed on to deputy Chief Aikman, who also called me on my cell. Regardless of this, I called Bob back. He informed me when I called that there was a decision about the complaint that I had filed. I will repeat his words using quotes:

Bob said as follows:

“I was told that the powers that be have decided that your complaint falls within the guidelines of the Cornwall Public Inquiry, and they are going to wait for the Inquiry to run its course before they decide what they are going to do.”

I asked Bob that this decision be sent to me in writing, gave him my new address and we ended the call. As stated earlier, that was 17 days ago. I feel that this has been ample time for this letter to get to me. I am forwarding my address once again. I am anticipating your prompt action and attention to this request.

Sincerley,
John Mac Donald

(8) 01 November 2007

Cornwall Chief of Police Daniel Parkinson advises John MacDonald that “we” anticipate the Cornwall Public Inquiry will address John’s “concerns” (John’s “concerns” are that Pelletier, Griffiths and Murray MacDonald obstructed justice – a criminal offence. )

Subject:

Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:00:13 -0400

From: parkinson.d@cornwallpolice.com

To: [John MacDonald]

CC: cornwall@theinquiry.ca; Pierre.Dumais@jus.gov.on.ca

Mr. MacDonald

At your request, I am sending you this letter (email) confirming the response earlier provided by Sgt. Burnie.

It is our understanding that you have already brought the subject matter of your complaint to the attention of Commission Counsel for the Cornwall Public Inquiry.  Since the mandate of that Inquiry involves a review of public institutions including the Attorney General’s office , we anticipate that your concerns will be addressed during the course of the Cornwall Public Inquiry.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

Daniel C. Parkinson

Chief of Police

Cornwall Community Police Service

613-933-5000 ext. 2400

Fax 613-932-9317

“The basic mission for the police is to prevent crime and disorder”

Sir Robert Peel, 1829.

(9) 27 November 2007:

John MacDonald email request to Cornwall Chief of Police Dan Parkinson seeking verification of various dates regarding the obstruction of justice complaint.

Chief Parkinson:

I am requesting the following information:

1-The incident report # for the complaint that I filed against Murray Mac Donald, Peter Griffiths and Robert Pelletier

2-The time and date that the incidents were reported

3-The name of the officer that took the information

4-The date that I spoke with Sean White regarding this same information

5-The date that I spoke by phone with both yourself and Deputy Chief Aikman regarding this complaint

I am requesting this information to verify my own notes before pursuing this matter any further.

Anticipating your reply,
John Mac Donald

(10)  06 December 2007:

Chief Dan Parkinson responds to John’s email of 27 November 2007.

Subject: Your email to Chief Parkinson, November 27, 2007
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 12:36:16 -0500
From: derochie.g@cornwallpolice.com
To: [John MacDonald]

Mr. MacDonald,

The following is the response to your inquiry:

1. The incident number created to record your complaint is CW07001620.

2. The date of that incident is February 3, 2007.

3. The name of the officer to whom you made the complaint to is Acting Sergeant S. Coulter.

4. The date you spoke to Detective Sergeant S. White was January 26, 2007. He reported that contact under Incident #CW07001225.

5. The date of your telephone conversation with Chief D. Parkinson is unknown however it would have been a day or two prior to your speaking with Deputy Chief D. Aikman and that was on May 17, 2007.

Regards,
Garry Derochie
Cornwall Community Police Service

(11) 10 December 2007

John email to Garry Derochie asking who are “the powers that be” who have decided that John’s complaint is a Cornwall Public Inquiry matter

From:  [John MacDonald]

Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 9:20 PM

To: Garry Derochie; [and various recipinets]

Subject: FW: Obstruction Of Justice complaint Garry Derochie:

I am forwarding you my original e-mail that I sent to Chief Parkinson, and the Chiefs’ reply. In my original e-mail I quoted Bob Burnie as saying to me, “I am told that the powers that be have decided….”. In the reply from the Chief, he confirms the response by Sgt. Burnie. Before I take any further steps in dealing with this matter, I need to know who has decided that this issue is a Cornwall Public Inquiry matter, so in other words, who are the powers that be that decided that this is a matter for the inquiry.

Anticipating your prompt reply,
John Mac Donald

(12) 03 January 2008

Staff Sgt. Garry Derochie responds to John MacDonald re “the powers that be”

Subject: RE: Obstruction Of Justice complaint
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:11:24 -0500
From: derochie.g@cornwallpolice.com
To: [John MacDonald]

Good afternoon Mr. MacDonald,

Let me begin by apologizing for the delay in this response. I was away from the office for two weeks prior to Christmas and that period of time led into my holiday time.  I am unable to consult with Sgt. Burnie at this time to confirm who he meant by “the powers to be”, however I don’t believe it is of any consequence to whatever further steps you intend to take. The term in question is normally used when no one individual can be identified. I would refer you back to the Chief’s response to your original inquiry.

Regards,
Garry Derochie

Cornwall Community Police Service
340 Pitt Street, P.O. Box 875
Cornwall Ontario  K6H 5T7
Tel: (613) 933-5000 ext: 2411
Cell: (613) 551-6849
Fax: 932-8843
E-mail: derochie.g@cornwallpolice.com

(13) 04 January 2008

John MacDonald reply to and questions regarding Staff Sgt. Garry Derochie email of 03 January 2008.

From: john macdonald [wildcard233@hotmail.com]
Sent: January 4, 2008 12:15 AM
To: Garry Derochie; [and various other recipients]

Subject: Obstruction Of JusticeGarry:

I thank you for your reply of Jan. 4th. However I am still a little confused by your letter (e-mail). You start by saying that you could not consult with Sgt. Burnie as to who he meant when he said “the powers that be”. That would tell me that there is a who involved. Then you go on to say “However I do not believe it is of any consequence, the term is used when no one individual can be identified. This only leads to another question for you. You do not believe it is of any consequence to who?

I testified before the inquiry over a year ago. I at that time tried to raise the issue only to be shut down. I then spoke with Shawn White on Jan. 26th/07, only to have him try to have me deal with this issue through civil action. I then went back and spoke with Scott Coulter on Feb. 03/07.  Scott understood the issue enough to realize that it warranted an incident number, and an investigation. The next word that I get is from Sgt. Burnie, to inform me “that the powers that be” have decided it is an inquiry issue. You then refer me back to the Chiefs’  response, in which the Chief states that he “anticipates that my concerns will be dealt with by the inquiry”. Reading this paragraph I am sure that you see that things have come full circle.

I am left with many questions concerning this matter, but the number one question would be. Just where would all of this be if the Cornwall Public Inquiry was not in town? Who would “the powers that be” have turned to, to deal with this blatant act of criminal obstruction? How could Chief Parkinson be so utterly confident enough to state that he “anticipates that my concerns will be dealt with”?

Once again Garry,
Anticipating your reply,
John Mac Donald

(14)  27 January 2009

Over a year since his last contact, and with hearings at the inquiry ending that week, John emails S/Sgt. Garry Derochie

Subject:  Obstruction of Justice

Date: Tue 27/01/2009 4:25 PM

From:  [John MacDonald]

To:  Garry Derochie [and others]

Garry:

John Mac Donald here. I would like to set up a meeting in the next few days to discuss the complaint that I filed in January of last year. Mr. Pelltier, Mr. Mac Donald and Mr.Griffiths have had the opportunity to take the stand at the Inquiry and present evidence. I feel that I have been more then patient and have been willing to hear their side of the events that transpired before acting on the complaint. Please get back to me as quickly as possible.

Anticipating your prompt reply,
John Mac Donald
613-xxx-xxxx

(15) 29 January 2009

Derochie responds

Subject: Your email dated 27th January
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:23:19 -0500
From: derochie.g@cornwallpolice.com
To: [John MacDonald]
Good morning John,

Just a quick note to let you know I received your email. I’m working on something else right now that has me fully engaged. I’ll get back to you at the start of next week.

Regards,

Garry

Garry Derochie
Cornwall Community Police Service
340 Pitt Street, P.O. Box 875

(16)  03 February 2009

Derochie second response to John’s email of 27 January 2009

Subject: Your email of January 27th
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:21:20 -0500
From: derochie.g@cornwallpolice.com
To: [John MacDonald]
Good afternoon John,

Please be advised that your matter is still under review and you will be advised as soon as possible.

Regards,

Garry

Garry Derochie
Cornwall Community Police Service
340 Pitt Street, P.O. Box 875
Cornwall Ontario  K6H 5T7

Have you ever seen the like of it?

What a royal run-around!

****

Still battling some sort of a bug.  Bone tired. Sniffles.  Headache.  Nothing desperate, just a wee touch of misery 🙁  I think perhaps a little better today 🙂

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)

This entry was posted in Accused or charged, Cornwall, John MacDonald and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Royal run-around

  1. Myomy says:

    The “powers that be” do not want to deal with this. Congratulations John for getting them down in writing on every detail of this run around. We all see at the inquiry how poor their memories can be if it is to their advantage. Keep after them and keep documentation on all of it. The mere recitation of this royal run around tells a story.

Leave a Reply

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