What’s wrong with this picture?

Share Button

What the heck is this all about?

20 July 2010:  Attorney General announces “coordinated approach” to sexual assault cases

Some kind of a “coordinated” approach is being implemented to help sex abuse victims, but the who, how, when and where of implementation is a mystery.

And, ……………….there won’t be a press conference announcing the coordinated response networks “out of respect for the victims”?!

Out of respect for the victims???! 

How could a press conference possibly cause problems for the victims?  I am lost on this one.  Truly lost.

Note, by the way, Bentley did say “victims.”  This is one of those rare moments in time when the multitude of “alleged” victims of Cornwall can publicly be deemed victims.  Heaven forbid the government squander funds on “alleged” victims!  So, for this moment in time , and when it comes doling out funds to the lucky beneficiaries, and when the beneficiaries themselves  talk statistics – the “alleged” victims of Cornwall, and I suppose for that matter everywhere else, can be counted as victims.

Strange isn’t it?  How often was a witness at the inquiry reprimaned/corrected for saying “victim.”  Instant correction: “Alleged” victim.

But, the funds are flowing.  I wonder how many agencies vie for funds based on the numbers of  “alleged” victims they aid?  Do they say “victims”?  or, do they say “alleged” victims? I’m thinking it’s the former.  I could be wrong, but I’m thinking it’s the former. 

So why is it alright to say “victims” in one setting and not in another?

I know there’s a legal dimension, but still,  it makes no sense.   Why is it OK to acknowledge that these men are victims in need of help when it comes to lining pockets?  and how can there possibly be so many “victims” when the bona fide molesters are few and far between – by that I mean those molesters to whom we can legally refer as molesters because they have been convicted or entered a guilty plea in a court of law?

If there are so many victims in need of help, why no corresponding list of convicted molesters? How can the powers that be be sure that they truly are assisting victims, those very men who are not infrequently called liars because there is no conviction?

It just seems to me that there’s something wrong with this picture. Why is the government happy to dole out funds for “alleged” victims who, for this moment in time, are construed as victims?

I don’t think I am making my point too clearly, but there is something here which doesn’t add up.

I don’t begrudge victims the help they so sorely need.  Not at all.  But, there’s something wrong here.  What is it?

Enough for now,



This entry was posted in Accused or charged, Canada, Clerical sexual predators, Scandal and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to What’s wrong with this picture?

  1. AbsentObserver says:

    I wouldn’t exactly say the details about this coordinated response are a mystery. Over the course of the next two years, the provincial government will provide $2 million in funding to establish four centres in different parts of Ontario. These centres (which will be in northern, western and eastern Ontario as well as the GTA) will offer services to male victims of sexual abuse. Although they likely won’t approach the level of services offered at comparable centres geared towards assisting female victims of sexual abuse, it seems to be at least a good place to start. The funding is also recurring, which means it won’t be necessary for the centre operators to continuously reapply for money each year. It will be forthcoming on a sustained basis. Each centre will be organized and staffed by people trained to assist victims of sexual abuse and each centre’s services will be geared towards the men it serves.
    I do agree with you it’s odd there was no press conference out of respect for the victims. That seems strange to me. It’s not as if unwilling victims were going to be paraded around for the cameras. At most it might have provided some victims the opportunity, if they had so chosen, to be there for the announcement. At least it would have been Bryant and some of the existing service providers from the community.
    The only question mark I have in my mind is how long it will take to get these centres up, running and effective. I hope it’s sooner rather than later. I have often thought the bulk of the $50 million spent on the inquiry might have been put to better use if funneled into services and programming which could actually help victims who are still struggling to find their ways in this world.
    My fingers are crossed. For now, I’m going to look at this as good news.

  2. John says:

    Absent Observer, you seem to have more info on this then the average person on the street. I have some questions.

    Can you tell me how these funds are going to be divided up?

    You say 2 million dollars………..Does that mean $500,000 per region?

    Is there going to be a seperate centre, or are they working with what is already in place?

    Such as VWOP, The Men’s Project, Family Counselling Centre and so on?

    If it is a new centre, how far does $500,000 go in todays economy, to find, furnish and staff such a centre?

    If there is not going to be a press conference, then how does one know when and if such a centre has been set up?

    You saay in your blog that “each centre will be staffed by people trained to assist victims of sexual abuse”……..Trained in what?

    You go on to say that “each centre’s services will be geared towards the men it serves”…….Meaning?

    John Mac Donald

  3. AbsentObserver says:

    I don’t think anyone, at this point, knows the specifics. That will take time and planning to figure out. The fact is services for male sexual abuse victims (or survivors, as I believe some would rather be referred) are decades behind those available to women in our communities. For many men, as I believe Sylvia as mentioned in the past, disclosing sexual abuse can be a process steeped in shame and humiliation. This has been long been considered one of the primary reasons men delay disclosure of abuse.
    This has also, in my opinion, been one of the main reasons why services have been few and far between in the past. It’s not a stretch to believe any service providers who might have opened shop and put up a shingle 20 years in Cornwall might have had a tough time staying in business.
    But the times, thankfully, are changing. There is, in some circles, a narrowing stigma attached to being a man who was sexually abused. The effort and the movement to offer services to these men is in its infancy. Yes, there have been some organizations which have been trying for a few years to reach out to victims of abuse, but I really believe this is a watershed moment in the recognition of the need for these services.
    So, John, you asked me some questions. I don’t know how the money will be divided up, I don’t know if it’s going to be spent $500,000 in each region and I can’t say how the centres will be established. Like I said, that’s going to be part of the planning process. I can only tell you what I’ve been told … and that is money is forthcoming to establish four centres in Ontario at which staff will endeavour to help victims. Who are these people going to be? I don’t know. What sort of help? I don’t know.
    Like I said, for now, I’m considering this good news. As usual, I will wait and see if anything good actually comes out of it.

  4. John says:

    Absent Observer…….your second blog seems to be a tad different than your first. Basically what Bentley said was NOTHING. Nothing more than a promise of things to come, and we all know by now what a politicians promise has come to mean……NOTHING!!!!

    One shingle that was put up more then 20 years ago could have still been hanging there had things been done right from the beginning. That one being the one holding the address of the Dunlop residence on Amelia Street.

    John Mac Donald

  5. Sylvia says:

    You are so right John!

    Perhaps you are taking me closer to whatever it is that is unsettling me….

    Perry was there. Perry was trusted. For whatever the reason, men were at ease disclosing to Perry.

    Perry, as you well know Absent Observer, was savaged. So, it wasn’t that victims/”alleged” victims had no one to support them, and it wasn’t that they were afraid to speak to Perry, it’s that Perry didn’t pass muster with those running the show. We can all speculate as to the whys, but, bottom line – “they” didn’t want victims disclosing to and/or leaning on Perry in any way shape or form. No one was too concerned about the victims then, were they?

    And the very “institution” which is presumably now concerned about, and preparing to offer support and services for, male victims is the same one which turned itself inside out to put Perry behind bars.

    Does that make sense?

    Another thought…

    Isn’t there a conflict of interest here? Should those who are assisting victims really be beholden to the the government, specifically the office of the Attorney General?

    Should the same agency which employs our Crowns attorney and dispenses cheques to our judges be paying the salaries of those who assist male victims of childhood sexual abuse? Does it make sense that these people/counsellors, whatever they eventually happen to be doing, are beholden to the AG and hence the government?

    Do we really need government control of victims? Surely there must another way?

    And, finally, what is the office of the AG doing to get molesters off the streets?

    And what is the office of the AG doing to bring some sanity into the courtrooms to ensure that convicted molesters get more than an ankle bracelet or a few months behind bars?

    Am I living in La La Land? It seems logical to me that there would be no need to create a victim industry for males if those molesters who prey on young boys were treated like the perverted cunning and manipulative monsters that they are. And as long as the government is soft on paedophiles and sexual predators and ephebophiles and pederasts and whatever you want to call there will be legions of male victims in need of help.

    Yes, by all means get the molesters the help they so desparatley need. But do it while they’re behind bars – for a good long time.

    Isn’t it high time we stopped risking the innocence and souls of our children?

    I’m thinking that creating a victim industry is a Barbie Band Aid solution.

    I’ll say it again: There’s something wrong here.

  6. prima facie says:

    This coordinated “flow of dollars” is an insult, ….a disgusting and painful insult. Anyone who claims, “this is a start” should be “shot on sight”, “so-to-speak”, of course.

    Anyone who has worked as a manager or participated as a board member in any community social service “agency” or any “public sector” program, knows exactly what is going on here.
    This is nothing more than a feeble attempt to look good, while placating the dissenting voices. I mean really…if only readers were knowledgeable about these programs, the flow of new monies, where the monies are targeted to go, yearly re-applications, etc., etc., etc., and the procedures involved!!…then maybe, the “loud voices” would instil better performances by our civil servants and their surrogates/beneficiaries.

    Well, “Not So Absent Observer”…. You and I know the truth, don’t we?

    And well, well, well, the butt kissing, follow-the-money, proposal writing, public opinion forming, “Not So Absent Observer”, has some so called “insider information”.

    I mean, this is a BIG DEAL isn’t it……not really.
    Like, the $$$$$ are there, (not enough to make a lasting difference), but nobody knows where it is going?……ya right folks…..ya….stay tuned for next weeks episode.
    Listen readers, expect a little information at a time …but believe me, it’s not as difficult as “Deep Throat”-(Watergate era) or I mean, “Not So Absent Observer”, would like you to believe it is.
    Believe me, despite what you read or hear to the contrary, decisions HAVE been already made as to where these monies will “flow”.
    “Not So Absent Observer”, why don’t you really share your role and objectives with the readers? (search “Absent Observer” posts from day one on Sylvia’s site); decide for yourselves.
    Again, as I have written before, you (“Absent Observer” and your cronies) make me puke. You and yours represent the failed policies and practices resulting in why we are in such a sad, sad situation today. And the reasons given for such a sad state of affairs, “….we didn’t have the resources, we didn’t have the training, education, knowledge or technology…and on and on and on….” Pitiful excuse after pitiful excuse.

    AND NOW, as we the citizens have done before, we are doing yet again. We are giving the likes of you and yours (the very same policymakers and surrogates), more money to sit around and design more programs, or, pass on to your cronies, to provide a half-ass, who knows what!! Praise The Lord!
    You know…I think politicians, social planners, social policy-makers and civil servant-management, should only hold the same job for three years and then, re-tool for something else….like mucking out stalls.
    And now that you boneheads realize that you don’t know what you are doing…….well let’s just say, you are lost in a maze of your own creation.

    Okay, “Not So Absent Observer”, you know me and I know you. So, let’s do a little exercise. Imagine you and I are face to face. I take my right hand and remove my leather glove from my left hand. I then take the glove, in my right hand, and slap your face with it…..several times. Take that! Shame on you.

    Regarding these monies, you write that you are told something from someone. Again, as in the past; is this another secret? Not even the “main-scream” has the “poop” you are disseminating.
    WHO? Who told you! We want to know! Validate your assertion with a credible name! Anything else is simply rumour……no, it is bullshit.

    In an attempt to gain credibility you constantly repeat what has already been publicized, while remaining to sit on the fence, so-to-speak. Periodically, you share some bite of speculation or rumour, referencing an untraceable, un-named, source. Really, I mean really.

    Recently you disclosed to all of us, that for over five years, you were one of six chosen, special observers, who were privy to the on goings of the “inner circle” at the Cornwall Public Inquiry. Furthermore, you wrote that you were present at the venue for every single second that the Cornwall Public Inquiry was “open for business”.
    Concurrently, you were posting on Sylvia’s site, mainly useless and vague, fence-post sitting, mumbo-jumbo.
    Also recently you wrote that you had special secrets to disclose to the world about the “inner workings” of the Cornwall Public Inquiry and you wanted to unload these secrets. I don’t know if you meant in a therapeutic sense or simply in a “tell all” expose, type of thing. However, you vigorously asserted that you would decide on the place, time and person to “tell all” with.
    Then, in what I perceive as an attempt to gain support by some angry readers, you seemingly, maligned Commissioner Glaude. You implied that Commissioner Glaude had spent lavishly while residing in hotels in Ottawa and during his free-time in various Ottawa hangouts. Good thing that group of “sandbox buddies” had left town when you made those disclosures, right?
    I mean, it seems to me that it may be time to reel in “Deep Throat-Not So Absent Observer”; that is, unless….

    What is your agenda, “Not So Absent Observer”? Why are you trying to gain the confidence of these readers? Are you about to announce your involvement in assembling a board to explore how these dollars will flow…in the Cornwall Area. I mean you were an “Observer” with an acute observation of the wants and wishes of the “AG” and “CPI” architects? It’s easy to manipulate readers who are ignorant about how “government” monies “flow” or are dispersed, isn’t it?

  7. AbsentObserver says:

    Why are you all so against anything that might actually do some good? I’ve asked this before and I’ll ask it again … why do you all see conspiracy around every corner? After years of screaming from the rafters about the needs of victims, why do you all immediately dismiss something that has the potential to actually address some of those needs? I’m sorry if I’m not like you. I’m sorry if I can’t live every moment believing in the worst case scenario. Perhaps I’m a glass-half-full kind of person sometimes. I like to believe there are people everywhere – yes, even in government – who actually want to do the right thing and have no other motive but to help people.

    Sound familiar, John?

    *** All I looked (for) from the start of this whole mess was compassion, help. That’s all I wanted. I’m just starting to get there. And not through an institution, I had to find it on my own. It’s not right. It’s not right. Somebody’s got to be there. I don’t know who, but somebody’s got to be there, somebody that we can go to and say “Hey, here’s what happened to me.” ***

    I am at least willing to think this funding could put somebody somewhere to whom victims could say, “Hey, here’s what happened to me.”

  8. prima facie says:

    To the contrary of what you would like us to believe, “All conspiracy theories are not, “All Theories.”
    But, isn’t it just so easy to characterize some people “me” as a conspiracy theorist or whatever. Especially when trying to convince/influence readers who really do not know the facts or the “process”.
    “I” many of us, have reasonable and probable grounds to be very skeptical and suspicious of the “words” being offerred, by “real or perceived” negligent and abusive people-institutions.

    Regarding “the glass half full”: Furthermore, for decades, many of us “I” have based our actions and beliefs on the “glass half full” theory…only to find that it was poisoned, muddied.
    No one, believe me, no one has been more trusting and “hoping” for positive results than victims and survivors……only to have been deceived.
    In addition, many people “me” are skeptical because “we/me” have have been around for decades. Many of us “me” have been employed on “the inside”. Many of us “me” know programs from around the world have been accessible, but not accessed and utilized by “our social policy makers”, program managers, etc., becuase of the existing “social policy” or because of the direction and controls by the various ministries, “flowing the cash”. Many people (“we”)have been lied to and many of us have watched policymakers and caregivers intentionally lie and misrepresent facts to victims, alleged victims, supporters, family members and other caregivers. Etc., etc., etc.
    And’ “Not So Absent Observer”, I know you know exactly what I have said is true. Unfortunately you and yours want many people to go through the motions of forgiveness, healing and reconciliation, without including the necessary ingerdients that make that half full of glass truly nurturing, satisfying, healing and otherwise healthy. You see, “Not So Absent Observer”, that is one of the reasons why you are “there” and I am “here”….I will not “play your bullshit game.” Really, 2010 and NOTHING!! REALLY!!!
    You know as well as I do that you or I could “WRITE” “successful” treatment plan in two hours!!! Right?

    I mean really…do you want us “me” to believe, as you seem to want us “me” to believe, that you are so naive as to not understand why many people “I” are/am skeptical.

    You have “your insiders”, so do some of us.

  9. John says:

    Absent Observer……..To pull one paragraph of my testimony which probably comprises about 800 pages is pretty low. If you could, please put that paragraph into context for all to see and read. I think, and I may be wrong here, if I am forgive me, but I do think that just before this was my statement about the institutional response, wherein I likened it to sitting in the middle of a pile of manure.

    This paragraph that you pulled has more to do with the various institutions and their responses. More to the point the letter that I wrote to Father Kevin Maloney and his response, as well as the police response to not call the church again. From there on it went to the point of Detective Tim Smith and his response to stay away from Perry and Helen Dunlop, Carson Chisholm, David Silmser and ALMOST everyone else. I do have to say though that Bob Burnie (Cornwall Police) suggested going to see the Bishop LOL.

    I know that my testimony is not copyrighted in any way, but IF you feel the need to use my words to try to fit your agenda, then please ask my permission. If not then please use ALL of my testimony, not just what you feel suits YOU.

    Thanks, John Mac Donald

  10. prima facie says:

    “Revealing the Deceit”:

    But John; Brilliant! The point you address in post #9 is so very, very important for EVERYONE to understand. With particularity, your point is VERY IMPORTANT for anyone who is giving testimony and being cross-examined. VERY, VERY IMPORTANT!!

    Your main point relates to the extraction of a few words or a paragraph from an entire testimony, so as to fit into someone elses “agenda”. “Your” words are extracted from the “context” of your testimony and inserted into assertions of someone elses, in the “context” they attempt to convince readers and other “observers” to believe.

    As I/we have written for the past years, I believe the many lawyers who appeared at the “Cornwall Public Inquiry” were there, representing the “accused et al” and on direction of various insurance carriers and other entities, ultimately liable and facing numerous litigations.
    I believe, beyond a shadow of any doubt, the principal goal of the many lawyers was to ptotect their clients “at any cost to anyone”.

    As you witnessed, there was no “lawyer” present, that did not have a client to protect or was not trying to promote some rediculous agenda.
    I believe there was absolutely no objectivity in this “Cornwall Public Inquiry”, nor any attempt to represent “the community” in good faith…..there were many undisclosed agendas and hidden agendas.

    Instead, the lawyers were very successful at the job they are trained to do and retained to complete. I believe “the lawyers” “spun” a web of conjecture, presumptions, suppositions, speculations, guesswork, etc., therewith entrapping, leading and coercing unsuspecting witnesses into providing confused assumptions, presumptions, hypothesis, suspicion, guesstimations and speculative, hypothetical….testimony.
    (I mean readers, read the record.) It is replete with, …”would it be fair to suggest…”, “….do you think….”, “….could it be possible…” and similar.
    Parts of these testimonies will be expertly “inserted” in cross-examination during FUTURE and concurrent litigations or investigations to support defence representations.

    In fact, significant and important areas of Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Fantino’s testimony was brief…he repeated something like, “….your question calls for speculation and I won’t speculate…”.

    Unfortunately many other witnesses were not sophisticated in “giving evidence” through interviews and cross-examination.

    FINALLY John; as you know; just as “Not So Absent Observer” has done in this case, the lawyers did at the “Inquiry”. The lawyers won….Now, “they” have five years of testimony to study and dissect. Believe me, “words and sentences” will be extracted and utilized in the various other litigations and investigations-“out of context”, to defend their clients.
    If “Not So Absent Observer” was willing to study approximately eight-hundred (800) pages of your testimony, to extract a few words to support their assertions and then basically “hold you accountable”, what do we think will happen to the hundreds of unsuspecting, uninformed, “victims” or “alleged victims”??????


  11. AbsentObserver says:

    My intention was not to bolster or support anyone’s agenda. My intention was to illustrate the fact witnesses testified at the inquiry about the need for services. Helen Dunlop talked about that. So did Andre Lavoie. So did Albert Roy. So did Alain Seguin. I picked an excerpt from John’s testimony because he is involved in this current discussion.
    I understand the skepticism surrounding this announcement. Please don’t forget … I have been along for the ride since the late 1990s and know all too well the ebb and flow of government promises and realities.
    Again, I will simply reiterate my opinion … I think it’s good news and I will wait to see how it plays out. I will not shoot the horse without even checking to see whether the cart it’s pulling is empty or full.
    There are a lot of people in Cornwall and the surrounding area who desperately need some of the services this money could potentially provide. I think many survivors of sexual abuse will tell you one of the main reasons they delayed disclosing the abuse was because they simply didn’t know where to go or who to turn to when they were ready. Would it not be helpful if there was a place … one place … where a couple of trained specialists were on hand to receive them?

    And I know someone is going to ask me what I mean by ‘trained specialists’ … I’m not a doctor and I’m not a social worker and I’m not a spiritual leader … I don’t know what sort of training would be appropriate. I would think it would be important to have someone in place who can help. Is that a psychiatrist? A general practitioner? A psychologist? An abuse survivor? A mental health professional? I don’t know. Perhaps some people who visit Sylvia’s blog on a regular basis and have an understanding of the issues surrounding sexual abuse could offer up some advice on the subject. What sort of services would you put in place in Cornwall? Who would you hire to deliver those services?

    I’m just going to watch and see what happens. I hope something good comes of this.

  12. John says:

    Absent Observer…….I have read your blog and I sat with it for a few hours before responding. I think for you to ask on this forum asking what it is that victims, alleged victims or survivors need is totally unfair. EVERYONE, and that means ALL of us, needs help, that’s a given. What kind of help is an individual need.

    You say that you have been around since the late 90’s. If this is true then let me ask you a question…..

    #1…What is it that you were expecting out of the Inquiry?

    I am going to be all over the map in this blog because my head is full of things that I would like to say to you. I will try to keep it simple though.

    Do we really need a service that is already in place?…..That being police that investigate, and Crowns’ willing to prosecute.

    I am going to point you at a few cases that are presently before the courts (post-inquiry)….

    Donald Grecco (pled guilty)…..awaiting sentencing in Hamilton. Originally charged with 23 counts on 3 victims………whittled down to 3 charges on 2 victims.

    Robert Borne (pre-trial)…Originally charged with 19 counts on 5 victims….cut down to 4 charges on 2 victims.

    William Hod Marshall…(presently in court today)…You can follow his story and what is happening on this site.

    I guess that my point here is that I feel that you are looking in the wrong direction. You are looking at the wreckage left, instead of how the wreckage got there. Turn 180 degrees and look at the perpetrators of these crimes and hold THEM accountable. You have spoken to me about JUSTICE in previous blogs, and I guess that is what I am talking about here. Put these pedophiles in jail and innocent children will not turn into wounded adults who NEED help.

    I will leave it at this for now until you get back to me and start a dialogue. OH………you asked in your blog…….. Who would you hire to deliver those services?………… How about Perry and Helen Dunlop!!! THEY seem to have found something that NOBODY else seems to have found. What that is…….I don’t know.

    John Mac Donald

    Keep an eye on these cases and see if ANYTHING has been learned by those already in positions to do something about justice.

  13. Reality Checker says:

    RIGHT ON JOHN!!! Well said!

    Absent Observer you seem to forget one thing – there was someone there to lend an ear, hear the heartwrenching stories, cry and console the victims, try to come to some understanding as to what was going on – try to do something about what they were hearing. There was someone there!!!

    A cop and his registered nurse wifeby the name of Helen and Perry Dunlop!!! There door was opened – there phone was available. The local welfare office was even refering their clients to this couple because there was no where else to turn. How much more education/experience and/or training do you want for “trained specialists”???

    Look what happened to them!!! UNFORGIVABLE!!!They were run right out of town – WHY! Because they didn`t fit someone`s agenda…obviously!


  14. Reality Checker says:

    I wrote that last posting in a rush and noticed my typing and grammer are really bad!

    Apologies offered. Not sure how to edit (or if I can edit)after I submit.

  15. AbsentObserver says:

    I believe Perry and Helen have always had the best of intentions from day one. I can find no fault in the way they conducted themselves … from opening their doors and answering their phone all hours of the day and night to taking the position they did when dragged into The Weave Shed against their will. I have nothing but respect and admiration for the both of them and was heartbroken to learn Perry was ripped from his wife and three daughters for seven months because of bruised egos.
    I certainly believe the pair of them would be more than capable of helping anyone who came to them in need. Perry was a really good police officer and Helen has dedicated her professional life to caring for people’s health, both physical and emotional. I was so sad to see them leave Cornwall. I stood on the side of the road on Amelia Street on a warm summer morning and watched a moving truck being loaded up with their belongings, knowing they were really leaving town. It was very sad but I understood completely their need to shelter their girls from what was becoming an increasingly dangerous and damaging environment. I saw how devastated Perry and Helen were to leave behind that beautiful house and their families and their friends and the life they thought they’d been building there together.

    But they couldn’t stay. They had to leave. And I support their decision to do so.

    The only thing I wonder is … do they hope something will be put in place in Cornwall to help victims who otherwise would have turned to them?

    What did I expect out of the inquiry? I had no expectations. It was what it was. I had no expectations at all. Am I satisfied with how it all ended? Absolutely not. Do I think a lot of things were done wrong? Yes. Do I think some things were done right? Yes.

    Here’s my question … There’s $2 million coming down the pipe from the provincial government earmarked for sexual abuse victim services in Ontario.

    How would you (John, Prima Facie, Reality Checker, Sylvia) like to see that money spent?

    Or would you rather it not come at all?

  16. Reality Checker says:


    $2 Million well spent!

  17. Reality Checker says:

    “Bruised egos”???
    “Stood on the side of the road….”
    “Need to shelter their girls”???

    …and the BEST…”COULDN’T STAY”???

    WHY NOT??? WHY COULDN’T THEY STAY??? You say …”dangerous and damaging environment”???
    If they were in danger or it was so damaging – there are police for that kind of stuff – isn’t there??? Cornwall does have a Community Police Service – don’t they???

    As a resident of Cornwall and an “Absent Observer” who has been on the scene since the 90’s pray tell what did you do to help???

    I can answer that …stood on the side of the road and waved goodbye – Right Absent Observer???

    You’re despicable!

  18. AbsentObserver says:

    When I referred to “bruised egos” I meant there were egos attached to the inquiry which were bruised by Perry’s refusal to testify and I believe he was needlessly persecuted because he attempted to shine a light on some of the negative aspects of the inquiry.
    Despicable? Stood on the side of the road and waved goodbye? Reality Checker … if you only knew how many people, myself included, begged them to stay … we were devastated by their decision to leave. There were protests and thousands of people signed a petition demanding law enforcement and the justice system do something … anything … to protect this family and other members of our community.
    Please don’t suggest I happily bid them good journey. It was a very sad day … for me and everyone else involved. There were a lot of family members and friends who stood on the side of the road that day … we wanted so desperately to help them find a way to stay … we couldn’t find one. We all tried. Ask Garry Guzzo if he tried. Ask Carson Chisholm if he tried. We all tried, Reality Checker. Perry and Helen did what they felt was in the best interest of their daughters … again, an example of their overwhelming drive to put the needs of others ahead of their own.
    I’m not despicable, Reality Checker, no matter your opinion of me. Helen and Perry know me. And I know they don’t share your opinion of me.

  19. AbsentObserver says:

    I’ve also had enough of this. I have followed Sylvia’s blog since day one, and Dick Nadeau’s web site before that. I find the information and discussions interesting, important and invaluable.
    I’ve often commented on things I’ve read and given my opinion on a variety of topics.
    But lately, every time I try to participate the thread degenerates into a personal attack on me … which, again, I say I find kind of funny because not one of you know me personally.
    Want to know why your concerns and voices and desires often go unheeded? Because few of you are willing to engage in a conversation with anyone who doesn’t completely and totally agree with every single word you might write or say.

    So, that’s it. This is my last post on Sylvia’s blog. What some of you have heaped upon me is nothing short of abuse. And you … of all people … should know better.

  20. prima facie says:

    “Absent Observer”. You have chosen to leave. That is your right. However, we are still here. We who remain have had differences with each other at different times, but we are still here.

    Over the past several months you have been very vague and a fence sitter to say the least, however, in the past few weeks you have elected to take a completely different posture…..like night and day.
    Recently, you disclosed you had secrets to tell about the Cornwall Public Inquiry, but you would wait to “tell all”. You could have spoken out one year ago, two-three-four, etc., but you did not. You criticized the Commissioner after he left town.
    And, only in the last couple of weeks, you disclosed you had spent the last five years, within the inner circle of the Cornwall Public Inquiry, and, within arms length of Commissioner Glaude on a daily basis….yet, you remained silent and vague when or if you did write…..during the past five years. Were you “gagged”? Maybe if someone like you had spoken out, things would be different today.

    Now, you are attempting to engage people, in a very different manner. You are attempting to engage people who have been regular participants for years and years.
    Furthermore, you appear to be “slyly” disclosing information which has not been disclosed by any mainstream news media or the “pearheads” themselves. Willingly or not, you are attempting to convey that you have “priviledged” information and you are free to disclose it.

    Additionally, in your final memo, knowingly or not, you attempt to project shame on me/us because you feel that you have been “abused” as a result of some of our/my comments…..And, you follow up with…”And you…of all people…should know better.” To that comment I say, “shame on you.” “Poor me” does not cut it with me. The way “you feel” has nothing to do with me or others? Do you understand me?

    You have expressed that you believe we/us/me want everyone to believe what I/we believe and nothing else. Such as?

    From my perspective and as I have previously mentioned, it has been your words that have caused me to find you to be suspicious and untrustworthy.

    You have been challenged…only for a few weeks….and you are fed up? Really.
    Next sandbox.

    You see, from my perspective, I believe you would want me/us to prescribe to you and your ideas; if I/we don’t “follow you”, you ostracize us, running off to a more amiable group “for you”, declaring that you have been abused by me/us.

    And this is just the way the few $$$$$ will get dispersed; i.e.)to the blind-followers who are too afraid to “speak out”…..you know, the “programs” already existing….easy to manage. Does anyone other than me and “Not So Absent Observer” really know how quickly two million is used up…..and supposedly, without a “plan”.

  21. Sylvia says:

    Absent Observer

    It is unfortunate you feel as you do. You of all people should realize that passions sometimes run high on a blog like this. I allow people to vent. I always have, and always will. Only once have I interfered with a comment, and that was solely to protect the identity of a victim whom others felt was not yet ready to be identified, even with initials.

    I am not controlled by or in cahoots with anyone. Thanks be to God, I have a mind of my own. I try to use it as best I can. As much as you seem to think otherwise, I sit on my grassy knoll alone.

    I am not prepared to champion yet another layer of beauorocracy in this burgeoning victim industry. Will that stop it from happening? Of course not. But I have no intention of mounting a crusade to battle the implementation of every new layer. I will render my opinion as I often do, but it`s not something over which I will fall on my sword.

    You asked how I think another $2M of our tax payers’ dollars should be spent?

    Here goes, on the list of wishful thinking:

    I would love a few hundred dollars for software and a few hundred more for the services of a computer guru. More than that, I would love to see a few hundred thousand go to the Dunlops – enough to cover the many years of lost and/or reduced income.

    I would love to see Steve Parisienne reimbursed for legal fees and lost income.

    I would love to see the Dunlops retained to, for starters, educate the judiciary – Heaven knows that when it comes to dealing with victims of child sexual abuse the judiciary needs educating. The Dunlops as a team are more than qualified to do the job.

    I would love to see a hundred thousand or so go to finance John MacDonald through law school. He scored a remarkable 172 on his LSAT. I think that when it comes to issues of child sexual abuse John, as a lawyer, would have a lot to offer both the legal community and victims. Law school costs money. If $2M taxpayers dollars are up for grabs I think that would be money well spent.

    I can think of lots of ways to spend taxpayers money if its there begging to be spent. For now, I`ll stick with settling long-overdue accounts with the Dunlops and Steve, retaining the Dunlops to educate the judiciary, and financing John through law school.

    That’s my wish list Absent Observer. You asked. That’s my answer.

    Final word: I think someone already said this, but the truth is if everyone was doing his/her job there would be no need for an Ombudsman, nor would be no need for what sounds awfully like a sort of clearing house for victims. And I firmly believe that if those who don’t do their jobs properly are held accountable people would very quickly be doing their jobs.

    Why hire a new layer of “experts” to do what police officers, Crowns and judges should be doing in the first place?

  22. Reality Checker says:

    Sylvia – I’m going to weigh in with some thoughts of my own and not so passionately – please bare with me.

    You know my background and you know who I am – so does Perry, Helen, John, Steve and a number of others. I’ve been in the background for quite awhile now – mostly doing research or looking for info. I’m not a participant and have no personal knowledge of what actually transpired in Cornwall nor the Cornwall Public Inquiry. As you know my initial interest and contact with you, this blog and other forums was NOT the subject of childhood sexual abuse (although it obviously grew into a strong interest). My initial interest was in the WHISTLEBLOWER and what was happening to him.

    You see Absent Observer – there is no one else I can relate so well to in this sorrid saga as I can with Helen and Perry Dunlop….cause I too am a WHISTLEBLOWER who made national headlines and had my 5 minutes of fame on a national documentary exposing government wrongdoing and oversight in abuse at the other end of the spectrum –and I am still waiting for action and the results of multiple investigations (OPP, RCMP, Revenue Canada, and from what I understand the US IRA and FBI). I have come to hate that word – “whistleblower”. The only personal info I will reveal on this blog is that I am a widow with 2 children and I definitely did not deserve what happened to me and my 2 children for exposing the wrong doing!!! I also know what it’s like to get run out of your hometown for exposing some very very evil and crooked people who were supposedly your friends and/or co-workers. People who you thought would help only to find out their only objective was to take you down no matter how far down you went. I know what it’s like to receive the death threats – try getting a call at 4 o’clock in the morning – at work – and NOT the only one!!! I know what it’s like to sleep with a knife under your pillow because you’re so damned terrified and have never had that kind of fear before in your lifetime. I know what it’s like to lose it all!!! To watch it all go up in smoke and not one person listened to my screams or did anything! I know what it’s like to constantly ask yourself – “where…where are the cops???” The only difference between what Perry and Helen Dunlop went through is in their case an inquiry was called and Perry landed in jail for refusing to testify. (Perry’s saga also became more high profile within the media.) There’s been no inquiry with what I have been dealing with and so far I haven’t landed in jail. There are many similarities in the stories of – what happened to the whistleblower.

    Why am I divulging this???
    Cause Absent Observer hit a nerve!!! A BIG nerve!!!
    My passion is for the WHISTLEBLOWER!!!
    Until you step up to the plate….
    Until you go to bat for something you believe so strongly in your heart is wrong….you have the proof – you have the documentation and everyone else knows it’s wrong and criminal!!!

    Until you stand alone – with NO ONE doing anything about it…..
    Until you’re persecuted so horribly for standing up for what is right….
    Until you experience the raw reality of being a WHISTLEBLOWER and the consequences…..
    Until there are drastic changes in the law and protection for the WHISTLEBLOWER
    Don’t anyone tell me HOW the Whistleblower feels!!!
    My heart will always be with Helen and Perry (I have children too!)
    They are a special breed of people – few exist!!!
    Sylvia’s right – the Dunlop family deserve to be compensated!!! So does Steve!!!
    …and John…. I’m going to need a “damned good lawyer” awfully darn soon!!!
    I am sooo proud of you!!!
    As John says – Can’t look back with the same eyes – can we!!!
    Keep up the good work Sylvia – you are truly an asset to all of us!!!
    TAKE CARE – need a vacation 

  23. Sylvia says:

    Well done, Reality Checker. Tell it like it is.

    How could anyone begin to know?

    In your telling perhaps we can get a bird’s eye view. Perhaps we can begin to understand what, by the grace of God, we will never experience first-hand, but, by the same grace of God, will have the courage to do if and when such great sacrifice is asked of us.

    You’re one of the silver linings in the dark clouds that envelop this sex abuse filth Reality Checker. A reminder for us all that there are good people out there who truly care. No strings attached. No pockets waiting to be lined. Just plain decent honourable good caring souls.

    You made it through the darkest times Reality Checker. You made it. You really did. Way to go!!! Another pit bull with lipstick you are 🙂 (That’s a compliment. Ask Helen)

    We’ll have to have a chat one of these days. It’s been an eternity…..

  24. Reality Checker says:

    So – Here’s what Absent Observer was waiting for and gave us the heads up on….There’s $2M coming down the line. The AG has decided to meet with victims of abuse.


    Is it safe to asume WHO ‘ABSENT OBSERVER’ is???

    And….WHY does the Catholic Family Services HAMILTON have their hand in the pot for this money???

    Give it a rest!!!

  25. Reality Checker says:

    $2 Million coming down the line from the AG – Remember the debate we had as to where this money should go????

    Well here’s where the money went (a year later….) Pilot project funded by the AG’s office (Link is from the Hamilton Spec – hope you can open it)

  26. Reality Checker says:

    If your a patient person – and wait – the answers will eventually come to you.
    It makes sense now – I’m certain I know WHO “Absent Observer” is and what his agenda was. Very very interesting……took awhile.
    However, I wish he would explain – why not Cornwall??? Why was the money moved AWAY from Cornwall? I don’t understand that. Perhaps Absent Observer can come back and explain.

  27. Reality Checker says:

    I admit – I’m slow……I missed all this – distracted by other things.



    Maybe a start – but I just don’t think aligning with already existing sexual assault centres geared to females (and run by feminists) is in the best interest of male victims. Something wrong in that picture.

Leave a Reply