Cornwall

Allegations in Cornwall, Ontario first came to light years ago when Perry Dunlop asserted that such a ring, was operating within the church and within the city itself. He had previously been aware of a case involving Father Desloriers, a Catholic priest acused of abuse in 1985, charged with 15 counts of SAing nine young men, receiving only two years probation, before being transferred to a new parish not far from Cornwall.

In 1992, a former altar boy named David Silmser approached officials in the Diocese of Alexandria Cornwall asking for an apology from the chuch for being molested by a local parish priest named Father Charles MacDonald in 1969; as a result of David's anger, he stole $40 from the parish. He was caught, charged, convicted, and placed on probation while aged 14 and 15. His probation officer was Ken Seguin, former semenarian and Father Charlie's best friend, who later repeatedly SAd David himself.

In the years that followed David's initial complaint, dozens more people came forward in the Eastern Ontario community with allegations that they were also as children and teenagers. There were even claims that children were passed from one to another by this ring. 

10 months after the Cornwall police first became aware of the allegations and 21 months after the diocese center heard them, Father Charlie was still functioning as a priest.

Allegations first came to light years ago when police constable Perry Dunlop asserted that such a ring, was operating within the church and within the city itself. He had previously been aware of a case involving Father Desloriers, a Catholic priest acused of abuse in 1985, charged with 15 counts of SAing nine young men, receiving only two years probation, before being transferred to a new parish not far from Cornwall

In 1993, Perry Dunlop stumbled upon David's victim statement, discovering the file had been secreted, lying dormant for months, contrary to routine police procedure; he also found that David Slimzer had made a monetary settlement with the diocese and asked for his case to be dropped; this settlement was found to contain an illegal clause which mandated David to tell the Cornwall police that he did not want to pursue criminal charges against Father McDonald. Jaque LeDuc, a 43-year-old lawyer who worked with the church, was appointed by the church for negotiating the payoff and flatly denied the gag order. He admitted there was a financial statement but insisted that it was never the intention of the Diocese to keep David from speaking to the police. He flat out lied and said it was never in the document, even though later, when people eventually got the document, they could see it right there. (Jacques Leduc went on to trial himself later on for charges and walked out a free man.) Dunlop made the decision to turn the file over to the Children's Aid Society. 

The police investigation known as Public Truth resulted in 114 criminal charges against 15 individuals. Of the 15 charged, one pled guilty, several died before standing trial, and everyone else walked free. Eight other alleged involved were never even charged in the first place.

In a 2009 article of the Ottawa Citizen, it was reported that Commissioner Norman Glowd found that the church, the probation office, and the police were all guilty of failing to properly investigate Claims. Additionally, after Perry Dunlop shared David's initial statement to CAS and the news broke that the police department had been sitting on his file and these Allegations against the priest who was continuing to work around children for months, things for Dunlop changed abruptly. His own cohorts and friends were questioning his motives and actions and he was suddenly dispelled from his job working in the police force. He was eventually arrested in 2008 for refusing to testify at the probe for the inquiry and sentenced to six months in jail. YouTuber Denise Tall was actually able to document this arrest, citing her concerns as a public citizen in Canada at the time. Supporters complained that alleged identified through Mr. Dunlop's deep research have been completely left alone by the inquiry, while it was Mr. Dunlop who had been hounded for his testimony. "By cracking, every in Cornwall refused to testify, and no one bothered them," said Sylvia McEachern in a Globe and Mail article in March of 2008.

Perry Dunlop at the time went to Constable Heidi Sabalj of the Cornwall SA unit and told him of his concerns of the case. Sabaj told him that she had tried for a month to get a hold of David initially by telephone, and also informed Perry Dunlap that there were other victims who had been killed by Father Charles as minors. Dunlap didn't understand why the case had been shut down if other victims had come forward. along with allegations that had been made against parole officer Ken Seguin. He alleged that proper police protocol wasn't followed. Dunlop stated in trial that both Staff Inspector Stuart McDonald and Deputy Chief Jose Dennis agreed the case was high profile upon their initial intake, their initial thoughts. Dunlop went to Crown Attorney Murray McDonald. He read him the allegations in the name of the suspect But Murray didn't read the statement. He informed Dunlop that he was aware of the Father Charles McDonald allegations, but not of the Ken Sagin ones. Additionally, Constable Sabaj told Dunlop that she had spoken to McDonald about it multiple times. Dunlop met with Sergeant Brunet later that week. Brunet told him that David, the first victim that came forward with the allegations, had come to the office to see Constable Sabalj and wanted to end the investigation on that day. And since they had no complainant, was over. Dunlop told the sergeant that he had an issue with the investigation ending and that he was concerned about Ken Sagin's probational clients, the kids that he was overseeing that had to come see him. Brunet replied, "We can't solve all the crimes a lot of the times. We know who is responsible, but there is nothing we can do. I've spoken to Constable Kevin Malloy, a Cornwall Police Service constable who knows a lot about SA, and we needed corroboration.'' Dunlop asked if they had ever interviewed Father Charles or Ken Seguin during the course of the investigation and confronted them on the allegations that were made against them. Brunet said, "No." So Dunlop continued: "Did we ever conduct surveillance on them?" Again, "No." "What has been done?" He said. Brunet replied: "Constable Sabaj had called some people." Then Brunet went on to threaten Dunlop, saying, quote, "You realize you can be charged for breach of trust under the Police Act? We would really hate to lose you, Perry. You've been through this before, but you were single at the time." Brunet was making reference at the time to an incident in 1985 where Dunlop was charged under the Police Services Act for failing to report damage to a police car of an approximate value of $100. Now you have a wife and three children to think about. You have your career to think about. You have to operate within the system, or you are just as bad as a criminal. You know in these cases, you have to dot your I's and cross your T's. The officer then asked Dunlop if he had any paperwork on the case, and the officer told him, "I want it returned. This is over, and you have to let it be. I've spoken to the Crown. There is nothing we can do. This guy is settled. He has a lawyer and everything." End quote. Their conversation ended when Brunet's phone suddenly rang. On October 3, 1993, Perry Dunlop noted that Constable Heidi Sabaj had come in to work, which was unusual, and believed she was putting the occurrence into the project file. Dunlop related that the project file would ensure that members, the patrol officers and members who work on the street, would have no clue as to the alleged incidents and that he had never seen or heard of a being entered in the project file database. On October 12, 1993, Staff Sergeant DeRochey, Dunlop's immediate supervisor, asked if he could speak with him in private and told him that he was investigating Dunlop himself under the Police Services Act. Dunlop recalled that it was odd for your own staff sergeant to be assigned to investigate you. Dunlop attended Police Act hearings and provided information and excerpts from them from Staff Sergeant DeRochey. Constable Sabaj and Staff Sergeant Lucien Brunet's notes and said that the entirety of the material as well had been disclosed to the Solicitor General, as well as the Attorney General in 1997. Within the excerpts, Perry Dunlop commented on the following... 

"Sergeant DeRochey (SD): Dunlop's actions were inexcusable, and he displayed poor judgment when he turned over a copy of the victim's statement to CAS.

Dunlop: ''These were both statutory law.'' 

SD: ''DeRochey, there were far larger issues and serious concerns at stake about how the case had been handled.''

Dunlop: ''What were they?''

SD: ''The Dunlop issue was secondary, and the real problem, criminal investigation, would be dealt with?''

Dunlop: ''When would it be dealt with, and by whom?''

SD: ''We continued to talk about the particulars of the case, and Abel said that the suspects fit a profile which normally indicates a pattern of of multiple victims being over many years. As is the case when members of the church are involved, cover-ups are sometimes involved. He believed that this might be the case in this incident. Slimser had been paid off to keep things quiet. Abel also informed me that they were not involving themselves with looking into Ken Seguin's involvement.''

Dunlop: ''Why would they not become involved with investigating Ken Seguin? The director of CAS was indicating cover-up.''

SD: ''Bell is one of the caseworkers assigned to the CAS investigation. He asked me if the names of the other two people by Father McDonald could be provided to them. I told him I didn't know at this time. The chief is of the opinion that we should not.''

Dunlop: ''Police officers under law are mandated reporters, yet the police chief said no?''

SD: ''Sabaj had consulted the Crown on this matter several times. Dunlop. Where are the meeting notes? The Crown told me that he had declared a conflict of interest in this matter because of his involvement in the church. He explained that he is a member of a committee and that he had been in a debate with the bishop over matters of secrecy involving wrongdoing by members of the clergy. He identified this case as being another example of the church covering up misconduct by a priest. I asked him if he was aware that Sabaj had found two other people who had encounters with Father McDonald at about the same time, a year or two later. He indicated that he was not aware.''

Dunlop: ''Murray McDonald is indicating cover-up, yet the senior Crown was still reluctant to arrange a meeting with an outside Crown?''

SD: ''He wanted to go on record as saying that with the information he had on the case, that he had no problem with the way Sabaj and Brunet had handled the investigation. He had been consulted by Sabaj on several occasions, as well as by Sergeant Brunet. He said that he was aware that Sabaj was having difficulty with the investigation. She was unable to get corroboration.''

Dunlop: ''Suspects were never interviewed.''

Sergeant Brunet chimes in: "I was advised that Perry Dunlop had turned over the statement obtained by David Slimser by Constable Sabaj. I was advised by Chief Shaven to get a letter from Mr. Adams requesting direction on the Ken Seguin complaint. I was advised to enter the report on the system under project."

Dunlop: ''There we have evidence of him directing the information to be entered to the project files.''

Jacques Leduc, a 43-year-old lawyer who worked with the church, was appointed by the church for negotiating the payoff and flatly denied the gag order. He admitted there was a financial statement but insisted that it was never the intention of the Diocese to keep David from speaking to the police. He flat out just lied and said, "That was never in the document," even though when people eventually got the document, they could see it right there. To those of you who aren't familiar, a gag order is an order, typically a legal order by a court or government, restricting information or comment from being made publicly or passed on to any unauthorized third party. LeDuc, the lawyer, claimed that he did not see the final signed document with the illegal clause and that the signed full release and undertaking not to disclose was handed over to the Diocese in a bizarre sealed manila envelope. Additionally, officials at the church claimed that they had never even opened the envelope to check the signed papers inside, and therefore they had failed to see the illegal clause. Out of sight, out of mind, I guess. Well, Bishop Eugene Leroux also denied a gag order. He said they never imposed those rules on David, but he acknowledged the payout to the victim. He indicated he had initially been opposed to the payment and had even consulted some of his fellow bishops who told him not to give in. However, the bishop gave the payout anyways because David had a considerable bill of counseling charges for a psychiatrist and he needed help. The implication to one and all was that an unstable David had lied about being somehow blackmailed officials from the church into giving them money to be charitable and was now lying about a gag order. David, however, insisted in court that he had never asked for the money. All he wanted was an apology. The money, he said, was offered after he confronted church officials in person with his allegations, and he only accepted the money when he realized that the police investigation seemed to be going nowhere. He likewise insisted the settlement did have a gag order, but it was their word against his. Once the legal document entered the domain, though, the following clauses were found. "In addition to the aforesaid release and foresaid consideration, I hereby undertake not to take any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, against any of the parties hereto, and will immediately terminate any actions that may now be in process. In addition to the aforesaid release and for the said consideration, I further hereby undertake not to disclose or permit disclosure, directly or indirectly, of any of the terms of this settlement or of any of the events alleged to have occurred. Breach of this undertaking will constitute a breach of settlement agreement, as evidenced by this release, and I will refund all amounts paid to me forthwith. And for the said consideration, I further agree not to make claim or take any proceeding or participate in the same against any other person or corporation who might claim contribution or indemnity under the provisions of the Negligence Act and the amendments thereto from the person, persons, or corporations discharged from this release." So that's verbiage taken directly from the legal document. It did contain a gag order. It did prevent him from going to the police and sharing these allegations. Paragraph 2, in fact, was the illegal clause which violated Canadian law. As I said before, it's illegal to prevent anyone from pursuing criminal charges or causing them to terminate any criminal action in progress. The agreement dated the 2nd of September, '93, was signed by David and his lawyer. It had been brokered by Father Charles's lawyer, Malcolm McDonald, and Jock LeDuc was in the deal as well, despite him adamantly denying the gag order and trying to make David look as bad as possible. Bishop Leroux called a press conference and quickly attempted to exonerate himself. The bishop explained that he had made his previous statement denying the gag order in accord with instructions received from our counsel and that "I have since learned that the signed release does in fact rule out both civil and criminal action." The bishop then encouraged David to go to the police with his allegations. David wasn't impressed. "This is the way he's dealt with me all along. I was the victim, and all he's done is make me look like a liar," said David, who believed that Bishop Leroux's turnaround came a year too late. Following exposure of the fiasco, Jock LeDuc's legal services with the Diocese were terminated, but his name still appears as a member of the tribunal, which is the lawyer association essentially associated with the Diocese. Additionally, 

In November, 1996, Richard signed an affidavit. The information and allegations contained therein were extremely damning for a number of highly respected individuals and, if verified, leave no doubt that a ring of had been operating in Cornwall for a number of years. In the affidavit, Richard provided the following information. Richard named a number of men in the Cornwall clan, and several of them were very prominent men and a number of Roman Catholic clergy members. He noted that some were now deceased and others were functioning in various capacities in their environments. Richard alleged that he attended parties and witnessed improprieties between the above-named clan members and minors from 1957 or 1958 all the way through 1993. He numerically named some of those who attended the parties, concluding with a number 34, both adults and juveniles, altar boys, and several others. He recalled one party which included: "A ceremonious ritual of candles in the altar boys rectums with sheets over them."

Richard alleged that the clan had a number of meeting places, most of them in or around Cornwall, but he also said the clan met inside the United States. According to the affidavit, clan members traveled to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on a fairly regular basis, where they would frequent an area called Birch Avenue and even a certain motel, which he named in the document. The motel referenced in the affidavit has been investigated by other interested parties, anxious to seek the truth in these allegations, but never one time by the Ontario Provincial Police or its Project Truth Team.

Gary Guzo - In September of 1998, Gary Guzo sent a letter marked private and confidential to Premier Mike Harris, claiming that the Project Truth investigation was not progressing as it should and had not followed up on volumes of information turned over to them. He claimed that he had traveled to the US and spoken with people who signed affidavit and made depositions which were served in April 1997 and concluded that they are not all lying. In his own research, Guzo asserted that the people who signed affidavit, who made depositions under oath, some of which are inculpatory in nature, have not been interrogated after one and a half years.
He said that: ''I am 100% certain in my own mind that the former owners and operators of the motel on the strip in Fort Lauderdale, where the complainant stated they were taken on occasion by some of the perpetrators in the 1970s, have not been interrogated, nor have the motel records been requested by the police doing the investigation.'' Guzo sent copies of this to all people in the Canadian government, top cops, members of law enforcement. And in February of 99, after receiving no real response or movement in the investigation, he wrote again stating: "I want you to understand how embarrassing it is for me to attempt to answer the pointed questions of a retired police officer with regard to this issue. This man is in contact on a regular basis with individuals who have visited the Fort Lauderdale area to investigate certain aspects of the allegations made by a number of people in the Cornwall area. The allegations center around activities in the late 60s to the late 70s and the motel records seem to confirm the attendance at a motel on the strip in the Fort Lauderdale area of certain of the victims and in the company of certain of the people named in the complaints by these victims.''

He reiterated in the letter his concerns for a potential cover up at the highest levels: "The fact remains that we are approaching 2 years since the formal discovery of this information to the two ministries in question. The fact remains that this information was available long before it was formally delivered to the two ministries in question. There may be many reasons why some of the people have not been contacted by investigating officers. However, two of the obvious possible reasons must be dispelled immediately.'' This letter was copied to the solicitor general, attorney general, chief of staff, police officers in the area, but the media didn't say a word about the interjections or the letter and nobody responded to him.

Michael Bryant - Attorney General Michael Bryant elected Judge Gloud who oversaw a lot of this coverup as commissioner of the Cornwall public inquiry stating that he met all the requirements. He stated: "He is bilingual from outside the Cornwall area, experienced in criminal law, and has not previously associated with this matter." Sources found this was inaccurate. Justice G.
Norman Gloud was the commissioner of the Cornwall Public Inquiry and formerly a member of the Ontario Police Commission, which caused many to be skeptical about his role in charge of the inquiry, stating he was biased. A letter, in fact, was sent to the attorney general, Michael Bryant, who appointed Judge Gloud, in which 200 people signed the letter citing their concerns about the justice being in charge of the investigation. But the attorney general never responded. 

The letter cited the following reasons for being suspicious about Judge Gloud: ''One, his grandfather was married and settled in St. Raphael's West, which is in that area. Two, his father and his father's eight brothers and sisters were born in St. Raphael's West and baptized at St. Raphael's church in the area. There are more than 30 glouds listed in phone books alone. Two Glad brothers, relatives of the judge, recently came forward with allegations of sexual abuse. Bishop Paul-André Durocher, our local bishop will represent the diaces during the inquiry. Durocher came from Sudbury where he served as an auxiliary bishop for the Diaces of Salt St. Mary from 1997 to 2002. Justice Gloud, a Roman Catholic, is based in Sudbury. Bishop Durocher and Justice Gloud both graduated from Ottawa University in 1980. Justice Gloud worked with the Ontario Police Commission, the OPP figure prominently in the allegations of coverup. We are presently trying to get more information on Justice Gloud's activities and contacts with the commission. Justice Gloud's office will not provide any of this information. Gloud categorically refused to make a conclusive finding of fact as to whether a existed or whether there was a conspiracy by people in authority to cover up.''

Gloud categorically refused to make a conclusive finding of fact as to whether a existed or whether there was a conspiracy by people in authority to cover up.

Ron LaRue - Ron LaRue alleged he was SAd by fathers Bernard Cameron, Donald Bernard McDonald, Eugene LaRue and others multiple times over the course of several years. At the trial he said that they had children in Florida, all over Canada, inside of the homes of these people on islands inside of Cornwall, inside parish houses. He also claimed that Malcolm McDonald possessed CP.

The clan's regular meeting spots were Ken Sigin's home in Summerstown, Malcolm Cameron's summer residence on Stanley Island and St. Andrews Parish House: ''I observed clan members at these meeting spots all the time, some more frequent than other. Other clan meetings were held at Cameron's Point and Birch Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.'' He also stated that he had observed Claude Shaver, the guy who the judge had represented at Ken's home, stating that he was definitely a member of the ring. He said he had also observed Claude Shaver speaking to children who were 13 to 15 years old. He also stated that he observed Bishop Laro in the 1950s and 60s performing illegal, inappropriate, and perverse acts with minors and himself.

In July 2008, in an article by the Cornwall Standard Freeholder, it was alleged that church officials had apparently considered a similar monetary settlement to that of David's in 1986 with two accused people, Bristen and Father Dlorier. Also in July 2008, another article alleged that father Deni Valancort who supposedly testified that: ''The sex abuse of boys is serious only if the child is prepubescent.'' Denise Valancort claimed that Benois Bristen and Claude Thibolt another victim wanted their allegations against Reverend Gil Disarier resolved quietly within the confines of the church. However, in 2006, victim Bryson's mother, Lisa, told the inquiry that one of the reasons why her family went public with the allegations against Dys Laurier was a lack of action on the Dasis's part. Additionally, Valiant court testified that the Dasis had no strict protocol in 1986 for dealing with allegations against priests.

Various eyewitnesses reported that visitors to Ken Sigin's home included Bishop Eugene Laro, Chief of Police Claude Shaver, lawyer and former Cornwall Crown Attorney Malcolm McDonald, Crown attorney Murray McDonald, lawyer Jacqu Luk, Father Charles McDonald, Father Kevin Maloney, Ron Wilson, the owner and operator of a funeral home, Steuart McDonald, a former policeman, Ron Laroo, a C8, and different probationers. Many of these men have denied ever being at this house despite having to transit through Sigin's property when they were going to Malcolm McDonald's cottage on Stanley Island. Additionally, when there was already evidence being against these men that they were in the clan.
Additionally, many men came forward and alleged that Ken Sigin possessed which showed explicit including minors including Ron Laroo, Dan Leel, and Gary Renshaw. And each of those victims provided signed affidavit claiming that yes, they were abused there.

When all was said and done, approximately 69 victims were involved in this affair. $53 million were spent, four years had passed, one person out of many was convicted, and no one knew if an organized Ridley had been operating in Eastern Ontario.

________________________________________________________________________________

By: Colin Browen...

Raped by: Otto Heckel