Crazy!!

Share Button

I have the “Grollier Hall and The Devil of Grollier Hall” page posted.  There is much more to be done – I await further information from several sources.  It could take some time as it requires finding and in some instances scanning documents.  For now I hope I have put together enough information to give a bird’s-eye-view of the horrors and Devil of Grollier Hall. I would appreciate any further information on Father Martin Houston which anyone can offer.

The articles posted to date are:

Grollier Hall and “The Devil of Grollier Hall” 

and the following which are linked within the article

2002 ?: Priest’s sordid past shocks parish 

01 August 1997:  Guilty plea in Grollier Hall case 

1998:  Leroux admits taking pics of boys  

It is deeply disturbing that Archbishop Hacault decided to ordain a man who was both a convicted child molester and dangerous offender. I had initially thought that Houston must have been the typical manipulative molester who beguile so many with their charms.  Not so.  Not at least from what I hear and read to date.  Houston was  not a personable man in any way shape or form.

Why was he ordained?

Why was he imposed on unsuspecting parishioners?

Why was no one told that he was a dangerous offender and convicted molester?

Antoine Hacault, Auxiliary Bishop of Saint-Boniface 1964-1972, Coadjutor 1972-1974 and Archbishop  September 1974 to April 2000, died 13 April 2000.  We will have answers only when, by the grace of God, some day documents are made public which show us what prompted a bishop to ordain and protect such a monster.

There are many questions here.  Many.

A final observation.  How long has it been since we’ve seen a 10 year sentence for a man who sexually abuses little boys?

And how about 16 years for Paul Leroux?

What’s changed?

On the other hand, why the kid gloves for Father Houston the second time around?

*****

I posted two other articles earlier this morning:

21 October 2010:  “Catholic priest accused of sexually abusing students facing new charge” and ” Priest faces more abuse charges” 

 22 October 2010:  Marshall faces more charges 

My comments here relate to the latter, “Marshall faces more charges.”

Note that Sudbury Police Insp. Sheilah Weber has allegedly said that it can take years to investigate historic sex abuse allegations.

Well, true enough, it has indeed taken years for police to heed  Ted Holland’s allegations.  BUT, but, Ted Holland’s allegations have not been under investigation for all those years.  Not at all.  Holland was told that there was insufficient evidence. That was the end of it. 

In short, there has been no protracted investigation into Ted Holland’s allegations against Hod Marshall, at least not that I know of.  But it has taken Sudbury police 12 years to pay heed to his allegations against Hod.

Anyway, let’s be thankful that it didn’t take Windsor police years to lay charges against Hod Marshall.  Ditto Toronto police.

And goodness sake, for all the expert testimony at the Cornwall Public Inquiry, it’s really looking as though nothing has changed.  Look at this…

Weber apparently said that an effort is made to speak with complainants when charges are laid, but that’s not always possible. 

Why not?  Why is not always possible?  For goodness sake, why not? Barring death, why is not always possible?

And finally. the question of booking. 

There is apparently a warrant out for the arrest of Hod Marshall in relation to the Sudbury charges.  Hod’s lawyer is presumably trying to have all the charges turned over to Windsor to be dealt with in one jurisdiction.  

 A week or so ago the understanding was that within a few days the Sudbury charges would be transferred to Windsor and therefore there was no need to execute the warrant.

Now we hear that Ted Holland is trying to find out what’s happening re the warrant. 

And then we read that even Weber doesn’t know if Marshall was booked in Toronto!  

Mary Ormsby, however, wrote on 21 October that, according to Hod’s lawyer (Andrew Bradie), the Sudbury charges were dealt with in Toronto when the new Toronto charges were laid.   And, according to that same article

Bradie said the charges from all three cities will be transferred to Windsor to be dealt with in an efficient manner before one judge and one Crown prosecutor.

and, according to Bradie

“We have to co-ordinate the Toronto charges in Toronto court and the Sudbury charges in Sudbury court and ultimately determine where it all leads after I have a chance to assess the entire situation,”

What does all of that mean?

And, how much time does he need to assess the situation?

Here it is…

Acording to Bradie, the process of transferring all the charges to Windsor could take "months."

Months!!!!

This is ridiculous!  Crazy!!  It should have been clear from the beginning that the allegations against Hod Marshall had the potential of turning into a jurisdictional nightmare.  Why has this been allowed to dither along until this point – possibly MONTHS to get everything together in Windsor? 

It’s not right.  It’s just not right.  Dare I say that the only one well served in this unfolding legal quagmire is Hod Marshall?

I’m taking a break 🙂

Enough for now,

Sylvia

ps.  My email address cornwall@theinquiry.cais the same as the one on the Contact page.  It can still be used without going through the Contact page.  Now that I have the Contact page I will stop posting my email address on each blog. I didn’t post it yesterday and the spam which normally lands in my blog email box has plummeted.  I didn’t anticipate that, but I love it 🙂

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

Leave a Reply

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