The AG

Under construction

19-21 May 2004: Ontario Crown Association Spring Educational Conference (Speakers include AG Michael Bryant, Murray MacDonald, Curt Flanagan, Brendan Crawley and Murray Segal)

16 June 2007: The Advocates Society Advocates’ Society Treasurer Marie T Heinen (Special guests Lennox and Bryant, Board of Directors Callaghna and Humphrey)

———————————–

19 April 2005

Dear Mr. Bryant,

Since attending yesterday’s press conference with your welcome announcement of the commissioner and mandate of the inquiry I have obtained and read a copy of the mandate.

I now have deep concerns regarding the direction this inquiry will take and therefore its ability to finally ferret out the truth and thereby give some peace to the victims and comfort and true “closure” to the citizens of Cornwall.

I will limit my concerns to the following two dimensions of the mandate which are troubling, and, after each, pose my questions:

1. According to the mandate, the Commission shall inquire into and report on “allegations of historical abuse of young people in the Cornwall area.”

The particular allegations of sexual abuse in Cornwall which eventually prompted this inquiry were not all historical, i.e., the Leduc allegations were not historical and, in fact, according to the allegations, Mr. Leduc, a lawyer and canon lawyer, was actively molesting young lads while allegations of a paedophile ring and cover-up were erupting all around him.

My question, therefore, is:

will this word “historical” prohibit Justice Gaude from inquiring into the non-historical sex abuse allegations in Cornwall which are integral to the sex abuse allegations which have beset Cornwall and prompted the demand for an inquiry?

2. According to the mandate, “allegations of abuse of young people have surrounded the City of Cornwall and its citizens for many years” and the Commission is mandated to “inquire into and report on the institutional response of the justice and other public institutions, including the interaction of that response with other public community sectors, in relation to: (a) allegations of historical abuse of young people in the Cornwall area, including the polices and practices then in place to respond to such allegations.”

While this is certainly broad, it is also noticeable vague. There is no mention of the things that have been gnawing at the heart of Cornwall for years: paedophile ring, cover-up, Project Truth. Indeed, the mandate fails to identify, and thereby conspicuously side-steps, the very problem which is at the root of the Cornwall scandal and public discontent, namely, allegations of a paedophile ring and cover-up involving many prominent men, including, among others, Roman Catholic clergy, police, businessmen, lawyers and judges.

I do hope I am proven wrong, but it seems to me that inquiring broadly but vaguely into allegations of sexual abuse is one thing, while inquiring into sexual abuse allegations in the context of concurrent allegations of a paedophile ring and well-orchestrated cover-up is quite a different matter.
Therefore, in this regard, I have two questions:

(a) Will this presumably broad but vague mandate actually restrict Justice Gaude and ensure that he is incapable of pursuing evidence and testimony related to allegations of cover-up and a paedophile ring – because he is not specifically mandated to do so? and,

(b) Does this mandate permit Justice Glaude to inquire into the role played by “the Church” in relation to allegations of sexual abuse.

I anxiously await your response, hoping that it will allay my fear that this mandate effectively neuters an effective and efficient inquiry.

Yours truly,
Sylvia MacEachern

The Inquiry

Cornwall Ontario sex abuse scandal

The AG