Cornwall Standard Freeholder
03 May 2008
Posted By Michael Peeling
An ex-Cornwall police staff inspector said he had little connection with a probation officer suspected of sexually abusing his charges.
Stuart McDonald, retired from the Cornwall Community Police since 1995, spent his second day in front of the Cornwall Public Inquiry Friday saying he only knew Ken Seguin as a probation officer who frequently worked at the local police station.
“He worked on very few of my cases,” McDonald said.
Leroux’s affidavit swore a clan of pedophiles made up of community leaders in the Cornwall area would gather at Seguin’s cottage on Stanley Island to perform sex rituals with young boys over a period of years, but recanted his statement last summer at the inquiry.
“I was never at his home,” McDonald said. “I had no idea where he lived.”
McDonald, a 29-year veteran of the force, did say he knew who Seguin was before he joined the Cornwall police because both his wife, one of Helen Dunlop’s sisters, and Seguin were from St. Andrews.
McDonald told the inquiry he didn’t know of the allegations of Seguin sexually abusing probationers until after his death.
When Perry Dunlop, Helen’s husband – a former Cornwall city police officer who investigated the allegations of sexual abuse by Seguin and others, often without permission from his superiors – was accused of misconduct for his off-the-clock work, the relationship between the McDonalds and the Dunlops cooled, according the retired police inspector.
“After all this exploded, and Perry was accused of misconduct, (the Dunlops) thought we didn’t support them and cut off all connection with us,” McDonald said. “They believed I should have supported (Perry) completely when he got the statement from Silmser.”
David Silmser claims he was sexually abused by Seguin and Rev. Charles MacDonald as a youth. MacDonald was never convicted of any offences.
McDonald believes Dunlop had no right to turn Silmser’s statement over to the Children’s Aid Society at the time, but says it would have been warranted eventually.
McDonald said members of the police force deliberately kept him “out of the loop” because of his family connection to Dunlop.
Although McDonald said he and his wife made a couple attempts to contact the Dunlops in the intervening years, as they felt “no animosity” towards Perry and Helen, he didn’t see them again until they came to his house in November 1996.
Helen’s brother, Carson Chisholm, the Dunlops and their lawyer came to the McDonald house with statements from witnesses claiming McDonald had been seen associating with Seguin at a party he held.
“I told them I’d swear on the Bible, but they said they didn’t believe me,” McDonald said. “They insulted me, so I asked them to leave the house.”
“I was completely surprised, flabbergasted,” said McDonald, who claimed not to have heard of any other documents linking him to any illegal, immoral activity.
McDonald said he had only vague knowledge Dunlop had been investigating allegations of pedophilia in Cornwall at the time and didn’t feel voicing his concerns to his brother-in-law or the police department would have any impact.
When asked if he had recommendations for inquiry commissioner Normand Glaude, McDonald described Perry’s situation as “a very unfortunate situation for the Dunlops that is somewhat self-imposed.”
“I have empathy for the members of the Cornwall police who have had to go through this, and sympathy for community members who have had bad memories brought up and regurgitated,” McDonald said. “It’s sad when a small percentage of deviants can bring down a whole community.”
Article ID# 1012353 ,
Comments on this Article.
And the worm squirms on the hook a little more
Reply | Report | Page Top Post #1 By dodger,
of course he never did see any boxes of documents
Reply | Report | Page Top Post #2 By dodger,
Perry & Helen you did the right thing disassiciating yourself with that liar
Reply | Report | Page Top Post #3 By dodger,
tHIS IS THE MAN WHO THOUGHT IT WAS OK TO BUY ILLEAGLE BOOZE WHILE HE WAS AN OFFICER SWORN TO HOLD UP THE LAW. BUT THEN WHERE WAS THE LAW BACK THEN WHEN EVERY HOTEL I THE CITY WAS BUYING IT. aND SMOKES FROM OUR FRENDLY NATIVES. THE SAME COPS THEN WHO COULD NOT FIND THE DIDLERS ON OUR STREETS CAUSE THEY WERE PEOPLE OF HIGHER GLASS AND ABOVE THE LAW WE DID NOT NEED A MUKTI MILLION DOLAR INQUIRY WE SHI\OULD HAVE LET pERRY DO WHAT HE WAS DOING AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE BEEN RID OF THIS SCUM FROM OUR CITY. sO TODAY WE HAVE LOST THOSE WHO KILLED THEMSELVES RATHER THAN ACE THE MUSIC AND WE HAVE THOSE WHO HAVE BOUGHT THE TRUTH FRPOM EVER BEING TOLD.
Reply | Report | Page Top Post #4 By what justice