Group sex?

Just in case people miss the blog re ex priest Donald Grecco posted today on the Why Four years? …

With no word re Grecco’s latest court appearance I called the Cayuga courthouse today to check the outcome of the scheduled 03 February 2010 court date.  I was told that the case has been transferred to the Hamilton courthouse “for a guilty plea.”  It is unknown what Grecco intends to plea guilty to.

Grecco’s next court date is 26 March 2010 at the Hamilton Courthouse, courtroom #302.  I don’t have the time – didn’t think of asking at the time L(  If someone out there knows the time could you please blog under Why four years?

****

While at the Ottawa courthouse for the Lahey shenanigansI decided to take the opportunity to check some paperwork, specifically lawsuits against Jacques Leduc.  Two have been filed at the Ottawa courthouse  – I checked one file (it costs money to get the files so I just pick away with a file here and file there)

The case file that I checked is still open.   I understand from the staff that there is a settlement conference coming up in March 2010.

This has been going on since 2005!!!!

There is one particular thing of interest in the Amended Statement of Claim I want to pass along.  (From what I can see the Amended Statement of Claim was amended solely because of a typo in the original Statement of Claim.  The original statement read “…the defendant MacDonald used his position of authority and trust…”  The amended statement reads “the defendant Leduc used his position of authority and trust..,:

Para 8 of the amended statement reads in part:

Commencing in the year 1989, when the Plaintiff , was 15 years old and for the following 4 years, Leduc repeatedly sexually abused, assaulted and molested the Plaintiff, exposed him to prurient sexual behaviour, encouraged him to engage in deviant and prurient sexual behaviour with himself and others.  The particulars of the same are as follows:

(g) anally penetrating and sodomizing the Plaintiff;

(j) exposing the Plaintiff to group sexual activity;

Group sexual activity!

That I had never heard.

This “alleged” victim never had a chance to take the stand to testify at what was passed off as the sex abuse trial of Jacques Leduc.  I can’t help but wonder now how much of the vilifying and back stabbing which went on inside and outside of the courtroom was to ensure that this “alleged” victim would never make it to the stand to testify.

Rather damning I’d say.  Of course, as we all know, these allegations have not been proven in a court of law.  And, as we all also know, Leduc could have seen his trial through to the bitter end – he could have thumbed his nose at the chance to “walk” on a technicality, and he could have fought these allegations out in a court of law.  Leduc  opted to for the technicality, the one which rested on vilifying Perry Dunlop and stabbing Shelley Hallett in the back.

His choice.  No matter, these allegations have not been proven in a court of law, and, in his Statement of Defence, Leduc denies them.

Also of interest, in his Statement of Defence Leduc claims that he has been targeted and charged because of his involvement in the David Silmser case:

25. In 1998, Leduc was charged with various offences as a result of an ongoing investigation referred to as “Project Truth.”  This investigation carried on by a special task force created by the Ontario Provincial Police proceeded to an investigation arising from allegations of the existence of a pedophile ring in or around the City of Cornwall whereby various high profile, professional men, including clergy, lawyers, judicial officers, crown attorneys, probation officers and others in positions of authority were involved in child molestation activity.

26. These allegations, as referred to in the previous paragraph, were initiated by individuals who were concerned about the settlement of a potential civil suit against the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall by a person alleging sexual misconduct of one of its priests.  Leduc represented the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall in this settlement and the matter gained much notoriety and publicity in 1992 and 1993.

27. It has now come to light that as a result of his participation in this settlement of the civil suit Leduc was a person of interest to those who alleged the existence of the pedophile ring and was targeted as a sexual predator, which led the police to carry on an investigation in his [sic] respect.”

How terribly pathetic.  But, really the same old same same old.  Leduc claims he was charged with sexual abuse because of his involvement with the David Silmser pay-off!   That means that he claims the very OPP officers who helped him stab Shelley Hallet squarely between the shoulder blades to get his first stay are the ones who had him charged in the first place!  Does that make one iota of sense?

Note there is not a boo about the illegal dimension to the “settlement”/ pay-off he was party to.

Note too that in para 26.  he says “were initiated by individuals who were concerned about the settlement of a potential civil suit” against the diocese.

A potential suit.  Interesting choice of words here.  A little more accurate than the standard buzz that the $32,000 was a settlement for legal action commenced by David Silmser, but ….still a considerable distance from the truth that the $32,000 was in fact an illegal pay-off to gag Silmser and keep him from having Father Charlie charged.

Anyway, I do wish both Leduc and Charlie had had the courage of their convictions to see their sex abuse trials through to the end so that at the end of the day they could either be found guilty or be in a position to honestly say that the allegations against them were not proven in a  court of law.

They didn’t.  Both bolted for the Charter.

I repeat, the allegations against Leduc noted above have not been proven in a court of law.

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@the inquiry.ca)