Three courtdates scheduled for tomorrow, Friday 17 August 2012
(1) Father Daniel Miller
11 am, courtroom #1, Pembroke Ontario courthouse (297 Pembroke St. East).
As I mentioned elsewhere, my understanding is that this is to set a date for discovery – actually four days of discovery. All being well tomorrow everyone involved (judge, Crown, defence, court) will have their available dates lined up up tomorrow and the dates can actually be set.
Keep the complainants in your prayers.
(2) Father Rheal LeBlanc
09:00 am, “to set a date,” Welland Courthouse, Welland, Ontario (102 East Main Street)
This will probably be the setting of another date, and it is doubtful that Father LeBlanc will be there, but, there are sometimes surprises. If anyone can pop in to find out what happens please do.
(3) Albert LeBlanc
I didn’t get the start time, but it will probably be in the morning. If you live in the area and plan to attend call the courthouse to check.
This is the sentencing hearing. Usually at a sentencing hearing any victims who wish to give Victim Impact Statements in person the court room will do so. Some victims may have prepared a Victim Impact Statement but prefer not to read it themselves, in which case it will be read into the record for them.
Also it is usually at this time that those are are going o testify to the “good” character of Albert LeBlanc do so.
I believe there is a good chance there will also be some sort of agreed u[on statement of facts related to the convictions.
I encourage those who can attend to do so. It is so important at the sentencing hearing for victims to know there are people in the room who are there who support them. It’s a difficult day. Keep them in your prayers.
As always, please pass on news of the outcome and links to media coverage.
*****
Court updates:
(1) Father John Sullivan
The next court date for Father John Sullivan is 04 September 2012, North Bay, Ontario courthouse. I will find out and post the start time before then.
(2) Father Mark Sullivan
As I mentions on Wednesday, this was a surprise. The last I heard was that he was going to enter a guilty plea. Then news that Father Sullivan entered into a peace bond and the charges against him were withdrawn.
I have been watching and waiting for media coverage to find out what exactly happened here. There is not a boo! If there is, I haven’t been able to find it.
Here is some information on peace bonds.
(a) The following was prepared by the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime:
Peace Bonds (Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime)
(b) And, from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General website (Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General website re peace bond):
What if the police don’t lay charges?
If charges are not laid, and you have reasonable grounds to fear that a person may harm you or your family, you can go to your local courthouse and ask a Justice of the Peace to issue a peace bond.
A peace bond orders a person to keep the peace for a specified period of time, and can include conditions to protect you and your family. For example, it can direct a person to not contact or communicate with you or your family, or to not come within a specified distance of your home, place of employment, or school.
In this case charges were laid, but, this week they were withdrawn. Did the complainant’s family seek a peace bond when they found out the charges were going to be withdrawn? Or, was there an agreement that charges would be withdrawn if there was a peace bond?
(c) This one perhaps answers the questions posed. It is from the website just answer Canada Law:
Question and answer re Peace Bonds in Ontario
Note that a Crown attorney can drop a criminal charge in exchange for a defendant signing a peace bond.
And, note the advice:
I don’t recommend that you sign it [Peace Bond] unless you have been charged with a criminal offense and it appears likely that you’ll be convicted, and the crown has offered to withdraw the charge in exchange for you signing the peace bond.
Is that what happened with the Father Mark Sullivan charges? It sounds a little like it, doesn’t it? Sullivan was either going to plead guilty or be convicted, and the Crown offered to withdraw the charge in exchange for a peace bond? Is that what happened here? Was it a bit of a sweet deal? I don’t know, but I will do my best to find out one way or the other this coming week.
I honestly don’t even know if this sort of thing is routine. I’ve never heard of it until now.
Finally, I would be remiss if I failed to let you know that I have received a number of emails from a small but irate cadre of Father Mark Sullivan supporters. They are angry that I don’t post information on protestant ministers who abuse children, and angry that Father Mark Sullivan’s name was added to Sylvia’s Site, and angry that Father Sullivan’s name is still on Sylvia’s Site. I have been told that Father Sullivan is “an innocent falsely accused person,” that I am anti-Catholic, and that I am “stalking” Father Mark Sullivan. They feel that I have not publicized Father Sullivan’s “innocence.” I was told “you need to understand how easy it is to lie and frame a good man all because he removed kneelers from the front of the church.” I was told the people of Father Sullivan’s parish want him back “overwhelmingly!!!” I was actually dared to publish the latter comment, and I can not for the life of me understand why I would not publish it!
Strange to say, there has been no mention made by anyone of the peace bond and why a peace bond is necessary. As I say, for all our sakes I am going to do my darnedest to find out. If and when I get any further info I will publicize that too. Meanwhile, if anyone knows what this peace bond and withdrawal of charges is all about please let me know. And, to those of you who have been emailing me, when I say “knows” what this is all about, I mean really knows, not guesses.
Enough for now,
Sylvia
“I have been watching and waiting for media coverage to find out what exactly happened here. There is not a boo! If there is, I haven’t been able to find it.”
Sylvia, perhaps the media isn’t covering this story because there’s isn’t one. You may take interest in any court proceeding against a priest but most people aren’t interested. Would you publish a speeding ticket or jay walking charge?
The police report is very clear: Fr. Sullivan grabbed a girl’s arm and sat her down. In our ‘justice system’ today that can be deemed assault. Clearly this girl’s parents have an issue with Fr. Sullivan and used this ‘breach of trust’ to hurt him as much as they possibly could. Shame on them.
You are committing the mortal sin of calumny in trying to portray Fr. Sullivan as a child sex abuser. You may control the content of this blog, but the ultimate Judge will decide where you spend eternity.
Apart from the specifics about the Sullivan case – the argument made by these parishioners that others – i.e. Protestants, Boy Scouts, teachers – are also involved in child abuse cases – is the most immature case to be made against reporting on – or acknowledging – the child abuse of the RC church.
It sounds very much like an argument “for” the abuse. It’s like a child saying: well, that other kid also did it. Why can’t I get away with it?
How about the (my) church hierarchy adopt this tactic: accept responsibility. To parishioners in denial I say: wake up.
Sylvia is reporting the facts – it’s all in the public domain. The deniers are raging at the wrong person.
Don’t be ridiculous Glen. A speeding or jaywalking ticket isn’t a criminal offence.
You say most people aren’t interested in court proceedings against a priest? You may unfortunately and sadly be right. But, correct me if I am mistaken: you are certainly one of those who is interested, are you not?
You say the police report is very clear. I gather you have a copy of the report? Would you scan and send it for all of us to see please? I have seen the police Press Release. I have not been privy to a copy of the police report. As I am sure you know the contents of a press release are in no way shape or form a recap of the allegations and police investigation. Please do send a copy. I, and I am sure others, would really like to see it.
And, one more time. I have not tried to portray Father Mark Sullivan as a child sex abuser. I know what the contents of the press release which reads in part:
Yes God will decide where I spend eternity. I am well aware of that Glen. God will decide where we all spend eternity.
The Brantford Police press release is quite clear. To infer there is more to this story (maybe a cover-up?) is to bear false witness. Please Sylvia, consider your salvation.
Glen, consider your own as well!! Sylvia isn’t the problem!!! Can you not see past the fog? Mike
I do an examination of conscience every night Mike and don’t take salvation for granted as per Jesus’ teachings. As much as I respect and appreciate the good work Sylvia has done I worry about her loss of perspective and potential sins of calumny and false witness. If you care for her you’ll do the same. Wouldn’t it be a shame for a Glendinning to make it to Heaven and victims or their defenders dont?
*Glen, you are just about as weird as they get !
You are so busy defending Priests, you have forgatten the flock !
I will leave my salvation in God’s hands Glen. I can not believe that you truly think a police press release is the summation of a police investigation.
Anyway, enough of this. You have had your say. You pray for the salvation of my soul and I will do likewise for yours.
*But they where only Jews..If someone pins me down I have every right to stand up to that oppression..Glenn must be part of the duck squad as he points to others and their actions and tries to make people feel guilty for protesting against wrongdoing. Turn around and have a good look at the people who run the church and their detractors including yourself. Anybody can see that the church is in taters because it worships wealth and not lesser souls like victims. My father put his life on the line to do what was right and came back with holes up his legs. I admire Sylvia for some of those same qualities. Righteously Crass or the Church of look the other way.
Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn’t misuse it.
Pope John Paul II
See everything, overlook a great deal, correct a little.
Pope John XXIII
They cannot even correct a little because they are busy looking the other way and we know they know everything.
I am happy that no charges were laid against Fr. Mark Sullivan. It is very easy to charge people with assault in this day and age. You throw something and hit someone of if you forcibly sit someone in a chair without his/her consent (Fr. Mark’s scenario).
The Criminal Code states:
Assault
265. (1) A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or
(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.
So, forcibly sitting someone down in a chair without his/her permission could be found to meet the legal definition of assault. It is not uncommon for people charged with assault to have the charges withdrawn in exchange for a peace bond, but the complainant has to consent or agree to the arrangement. The difference between a criminial conviction and a peace bond is that a conviction gives you a criminal record, whereas a peacebond will only be on your record for the duration of the peace bond.
It was sad that this whole ordeal resulted in Father Mark leaving St. Basil’s Church. We will miss him. Unfortunately, there are people who believed the worse and could not put those inaccurate thoughts aside, which in turn drove away a great priest.
I think that “Sylvia’s Site” is doing a great service to real victims out there, unfortunately, as with many things in this world, the public believes the worst, instead of seeking out fact.
I ask everyone, please, approach all situations by doing your research (and I don’t mean ask the local gossip), read, ask questions and then make an informed decision! If more people did their research regarding Father Mark, then he would still be our Parish Priest.
Yours truly,
Betty
Father Sullivan WAS charged Betty, on 18 May 2012. The details on the peace bond and withdrawal of charges are here.
So, Betty!
You bring the subject back to the surface…so: you seem to infer that YOU know or that you have some answers. Why was a peace bond necessary?…WHY did he “forcibly” sit this girl down?…was anyone else present at that time?… Who intervened or decided to “withdraw”the charges ?…what about the “local gossip” you refer to? and Where did Sullivan move to? Another parish? Which one? …Where was he before he was your parish priest?…Were there any other allegations, not covered-up by his superiors in another Diocese or even another country?…
For “research” purposes and to put this one to rest, with an “accurate”, “informed decision”, according to your wishes!
If you have some of this important information and did not speak up in his defense you can’t blame everyone else for not standing up, while you remained seated!. Consequently, don’t blame the people on this site or in your community who seek answers in order to ensure that children are protected from abuses by adults in position of authority.
A proper follow-up by Sullivan, the church or Civil authorities may have been very beneficial to him and your Parish, at the time. Your eight month “gestation” period…is a shot in the foot!…for “Father” Sullivan.
Unless your answers offer some clarity to your wishful thinking, as opposed to “inaccurate” thinking, your entry and mine were a waste of time.
Please do not rewind!…if it is a lot about nothing.
jg
JG: You have said it all my man! I was really upset at Betty and felt it was better to not write anything out of anger. If she has all the information she needs to make such statements, she’d better back it up with the proof here and now, or just shut […] up and leave. There…I’m done.
Not a very smart move, forcibly restraining a child and trying to get her to go against her parents wishes. Dumb move. Totally inappropriate. Obviously trying to bully the girl into doing as he wanted.
Obviously he was trying to bully the girl into doing as he wanted and counselling her to go agianst her parents wishes. Inappropriate and dumb. Betty, I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want to be forcibly restrained by anyone.
Sorry, everyone. I thought my first comment had not gone through. I only meant to leave one comment.