Explanation of the Malcolm MacDonald “ODE”

(scroll down for the ODE)

The ODE is an Overview of the Documentary Evidence on Malcolm MacDonald, “alleged” paedophile, active member of the Progressive Conservative party, Cornwall lawyer, former Crown attorney, Roman Catholic, member of the Knights of the Columbus, former Grand Knight, lawyer for “alleged” paedophiles Father Charles MacDonald and probation officer Ken Seguin.  The ODE was compiled by commission counsel at the Cornwall Public Inquiry and presented by Mary Simms.  It is, as is the name indicates, merely an overview and far from exhaustive.

The headers have been added.  I have also bolded the dates of Malcolm MacDonald’s statements and interviews, and bolded and italicized dates of events related to the Cornwall scandal and cover-up. The text is verbatim from the transcript with the exception of verbal references to Exhibit numbers in the original which I have put in brackets marked as “Exhibit.”  Each exhibit references a document referencing some or all of the material above.

Note that in interviews and written statements Malcolm indicated that in addition to his friendships with Father Charles MacDonald (parish priest and “alleged” paedophile) and Ken Seguin (ex seminarian, probation officer and “alleged”paedophile) he admitted being a good friend of

(1) Ron Wilson (member of the Knights of Columbus police; officer with Ontario Provincial Police at time the scandal erupted),

(2) Father Kevin Maloney (Member of the Knights of Columbus and parish priest who was accused and vehemently denies allegations.  Called police when John MacDonald was seeking direction regarding his allegations against Father Charles MacDonald. Named in Ron Leroux affidavit as “clan” member),

(3) Father Donald McDougald (Vicar general of the Diocese Alexandria-Cornwall who was intimately involved when David Silmser went to the diocese in December 1992 looking for an apology. In 2001 said anyone who continued to accuse prominent men of sex abuse and police of cover-up would soon suffer the consequences.  Named in Ron Leroux affidavit as “clan” member);

(4) Father R. J. MacDonald (named in Ron Leroux affidavit as “clan” member), and

(5) Jos van Diepen (probation officer who worked with Ken Seguin and Nelson Barque.  Identified in Ron Leroux’ affidavit as one of men who gathered at one of three specific locations.  Removed form the list during Ron Leroux’ examination-in-chief but apparently implicated by Ron as knowing about Seguin’s illegal sexual activity.”

During his muddled and incomplete testimony at the Cornwall Public Inquiry Ron Leroux recanted some but by no means all of his allegations. An already uncharacteristically confused Ron reached a point of such utter confusion on the stand that he finally said he no longer knew what happened where..  His “recantations” have not been tested under cross-examination.  The status of his testimony is unknown. To date it has not been purged.

Note too that according to the ODE an “alleged” victim of convicted paedophile Jean-Luc Leblanc was molested by Malcolm MacDonald at Leblanc’s family cottage in Quebec.

What else Malcolm MacDonald may have been asked or said about other friendships has not been revealed.  We have not been told if he did or did not admit to friendships with Bishop Eugene Larocque and/or former Chief of Police Claude Shaver.  Nor is there any indication what if any friendship or blood relationship existed between he and Cornwall Crown attorney Murray MacDonald. The latter is one of the trio John MacDonald  reported to Cornwall Police January 2007 alleging they obstructed justice.

Also note that Malcolm was appointed special agent for the Attorney General of Canada for Federal Prosecutions in 1985.  That was during the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney.  Ray Hnatyshn, later Governor General, was Attorney General.

Finally note that Malcolm himself says that it was he who got lawyer Cornwall lawyer Sean Adams to represent David Silmser as independent”legal counsel in the $32,000 pay-off. .

………………………………………

The ODE

“Angus Malcolm MacDonald, and we will refer to him as Malcolm MacDonald, was born in Cornwall on March 24th, 1930. (Exhibit 1160.)

Education and Employment

Malcolm MacDonald was called to the Bar in June, 1955.

He worked for one year with the provincial government under the Provincial Secretaries Offices Corporation section.

On June 1st, 1956, he opened a private practice in Cornwall, Ontario. From the late 1950’s until 1967 or 1968 he worked part-time as an Assistant Crown Attorney in Cornwall, Ontario while maintaining his private practice.

In 1968 he was appointed full-time Crown Attorney for the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry.

In 1971 he returned to full-time practice. In 1985 while continuing his private practice he was appointed special agent for the Attorney General of Canada for Federal Prosecutions, and as of October 1994 he was still a standing agent for the Attorney General of Canada. While in private practice Malcolm MacDonald also worked as a criminal defense lawyer.” (Exhibit 863.)

The Cottages

“From 1956 to 1957 up to the mid-1980’s Malcolm MacDonald owned a cottage property on Stone House Point. A few years after selling the Stone House Point property his sister-in law gave him another cottage property on Stanley Island.”(Exhibit 1157.)

Ken Seguin

“In an interview with the Ontario Provincial Police on November 18th, 1998 Malcolm MacDonald stated that he met Ken Seguin in 1967, when Ken Seguin was a probation officer and Malcolm MacDonald was appointed Crown Attorney.

Malcolm MacDonald stated that he and Ken Seguin became very good and very close friends. According to Malcolm MacDonald, the two worked together at the courts a lot.

When Ken Seguin moved to the mainland near Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage on Stanley Island, he began attending Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage on a regular basis, and Malcolm MacDonald would drop by Ken Seguin’s residence on his way to the Marina.

According to Malcolm MacDonald every year, for about ten years, he and Ken Seguin would drive to Florida for a vacation together. In addition, he had done real estate work for Ken Seguin.” (Exhibit is 1157)

Claude Shaver

“During the November 18th, 1998 interview, Malcolm MacDonald advised that Claude Shaver had not been in Florida while in was there.” (Exhibit 1157)

Father Charles MacDonald

“In the November 18th, 1998 interview Malcolm MacDonald described Father Charles MacDonald as a good friend of Ken Seguin’s and stated that he knew Father MacDonald well.

Father MacDonald would attend Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage once or twice a summer accompanied by Ken Seguin. During the time of the Silmser complaint against Father MacDonald, Malcolm MacDonald went to St. Andrew’s Parish House for dinner with Ken Seguin and Father MacDonald about six times.” (Exhibit 1157) 

Ron Leroux

“Also, in the November 18th, 1998 interview Malcolm MacDonald noted that Ron Leroux was a neighbour of Ken Seguin and stated that in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s Leroux attended Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage a few times a year in the company of Ken Seguin.

Malcolm MacDonald also drove down to Florida with Leroux on one occasion and on another occasion both Leroux and C-8. On one occasion Leroux and C-8 attended St. Andrew’s Parish House for dinner with Malcolm MacDonald, Ken Seguin and Father MacDonald.” (Exhibit 1157)

The warrant and seizure of tapes

“On February 9th, 1993 prior to the OPP executing a search warrant at Leroux’s residence, Constable Steve MacDougald called Malcolm MacDonald in MacDonald’s capacity as Leroux’s lawyer. Leroux had advised Constable MacDonald (sic) that Malcolm MacDonald was representing him with respect to a property dispute between Leroux and C-8.

According to Constable MacDonald — or sorry MacDougald, he asked Malcolm MacDonald to attend the Leroux residence during the execution of the warrant but Malcolm MacDonald refused.

In the November 18th, 1998 interview regarding the resulting charges, Malcolm MacDonald stated:

‘I know he pleaded to the gun charges. I think in Alexandria Court. I don’t know if I ever did anything or not on that. I think it was…’

And the conclusion of the sentence is inaudible.

“According to a statement made by Leroux, Malcolm MacDonald represented Leroux with respect to a charge of Unsafe Storage of a Fire Arm.” (Exhibit 572A, 1163 and 1157)

Ron Wilson

“According to Malcolm MacDonald he and Ron Wilson had been good friends since Wilson was a police officer. Malcolm MacDonald did all of Ron Wilson’s legal work for him. Ron Wilson attended Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage at Stone House Point a couple of times but had not been to the Stanley Island cottage.” (Exhibit 1157)

Monsignor Donald McDougald

“According to Malcolm MacDonald he and Monsignor Donald McDougald were friends, having first met when he was a student and Monsignor McDougald was still a seminarian.

Malcolm MacDonald also attended St. Columban’s Church where McDougald was a Pastor for a number of years. He stated that he knew Monsignor McDougald very well, but that Monsignor McDougald had never been to his cottage.” (Exhibit 1157)

Father Kevin Maloney

“Malcolm MacDonald also knew Father Kevin Maloney and did legal work for him. Maloney was the Chaplain at the Knights of Columbus when Malcolm MacDonald was Grand Knight. He stated that although invited, Father Maloney had never attended the Stanley Island cottage.” (Exhibit 1157)

Jos van Diepen and Monsignor R. J. MacDonald

“During the November 18th, 1998 interview, Malcolm MacDonald answered numerous questions relating to whom he socialized with at his cottage and elsewhere in addition to the above noted individuals. He named a number of other visitors to the Stanley Island cottage including his bridge group, retired friends, relatives, Jos van Diepen and his family and Monsignor R.J. MacDonald who’s described as an old family friend.

No Recollection of Nude Photos

Malcolm MacDonald stated that Claude Shaver had never attended at his cottage at any time. He also stated that he had never witnessed any sexual improprieties involving young boys at the Stanley Island cottage. Further, he advised that there had never been young boys at his cottage and he didn’t recall having photographs of nude boys.

Stuart McDonald

During this interview he stated that he knew who Stuart McDonald was but that he never had any social functions with him and that Stuart McDonald had never attended at his cottage.” 

David Silmser Complaint 

“On December 9th, 1992 David Silmser complained to the Cornwall Community Police Service that Father MacDonald and Ken Seguin had sexually abused him. In an interview by the OPP of Malcolm MacDonald on October 28th, 1994 in the investigation of obstruction of justice, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was first made aware of the Silmer complaint when Father MacDonald came in to see him with a letter he had received from Monsignor McDougald. The following morning he and Father MacDonald met with Monsignor McDougald.” (Exhibit 863)

“According to a letter from Malcolm MacDonald to Monsignor McDougald dated December 21st, 1992, Malcolm MacDonald was present at a meeting between Father MacDonald and Monsignor McDougald on December 17th, 1992. In the letter, Malcolm MacDonald confirmed that he was retained by Father MacDonald and advised that Father MacDonald denied the allegations, would cooperate in any investigation to the fullest extent and was prepared to under go a polygraph test concerning his response to the allegations.

He suggested that Silmser be asked if he was willing to submit to a polygraph. Malcolm MacDonald advised that they required a detailed sworn statement from Silmser in order for Father MacDonald to answer the allegations.

He further noted that both Monsignor McDougald and Monsignor Schonenbach were aware that Silmser had a lengthy criminal record, and specifically referred to three offences.

In a postscript, Malcolm MacDonald noted that he had spoken to Bishop Larocque and had brought him up to date on, ‘What we are doing,’ and that Bishop Larocque had indicated that Malcolm MacDonald should continue dealing with MonsignorMcDougald until advised otherwise.” (Exhibit 1161)

Malcolm Contact with Cornwall Police Service

“According to Malcolm MacDonald he had contact with the CPS about the progress of the investigation and they kept him apprised of some of what was going on. He also stated that he had contact with, ‘Constable Heidi,’ who mentioned that she was looking for more information from Silmser and that he had made several appointments which he had failed to keep and that Silmser had implied he was in a hurry to give the police full details.

In her police notes Constable Heidi Sebalj of the CPS made an entry on August 23rd, 1993 to the effect that she had received a telephone call from Malcolm MacDonald who had stated that his file was diarised for that date and he was looking for an update.

Constable Sebalj advised him that she was waiting to meet with Crown. Malcolm MacDonald asked that his client be summonsed and indicated he would escort his client as opposed his being ‘handcuffed, et cetera’. He also asked to be kept abreast of the situation.’ (exhibits 863 and 295)

Malcolm Statements re David Silmser Pay-Off

“According to a written statement prepared by Malcolm MacDonald on June 20th, 1994 at the request of the OPP, the question of compensation for Silmser was first raised in the early summer of 1993 in a call from Silmser to Monsignor McDougald and the matter was then discussed between Malcolm MacDonald, Father MacDonald and Jacques Leduc, at which time Malcolm was asked to contact Silmser to see what he was looking for in the way of compensation.” (Exhibit is 1155).

“According to Malcolm MacDonald’s statement in the October 28th, 1994, interview, the question of compensation being paid to Silmser was first raised in the early part of 1993.  He stated:

‘If I recall correctly, I think, Silmser called Monsignor McDougald and said, ‘I want an apology for starts and I guess he said, well, what do you mean then by for starts’ and he said to me, he implied that as far as I was concerned, that he wanted money.’”

(Reference is 863)

“In the October 28th, 1994, interview, Malcolm MacDonald indicated that sometime later that spring, after Silmser had been interviewed by the diocese, he was asked if he would contact Silmser.

Malcolm Macdonald stated that Jacques Leduc had reported back to him what had happened at the interview and that later the question of money arose again and Malcolm MacDonald was asked to contact Silmser, possibly by Monsignor McDougald, to find out what Silmser meant by an apology and what else he wanted.

In the November 18th, 1998, interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated he had attended a meeting with Jacques Leduc, Bishop Larocque and Monsignor McDougald, wherein they discussed a nuisance settlement. Malcolm MacDonald stated that Monsignor McDougald wondered how much Silmser wanted and it was agreed that Malcolm MacDonald would call and find out because Leduc said he couldn’t talk to Silmser and McDougald didn’t want to.” (Exhibits 863 and 1157)

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he called Silmser, explained that he was acting for Father MacDonald and that he had been asked by the diocese to find out what Silmser wanted. According to Malcolm MacDonald, Silmser advised that he had gone through a certain amount of money for treatment and needed further treatment. With respect to quantum, Malcolm MacDonald stated:

‘And that came to something like $22,000 he thought he needed, at least $12,000, he thought he needed $20,000, like, for compensation.’

Malcolm MacDonald stated that some time passed and he relayed that information to both Monsignor McDougald and Jacques Leduc.” (Exhibit 863)

Checks the Deal With Crown Murray MacDonald

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was asked by a representative of the diocese, either Monsignor McDougald or Mr. Leduc, to call Silmser again about the settlement. He further stated that before he called he met with Crown Attorney, Murray MacDonald and ‘explained the whole situation to him’. According to Malcolm MacDonald, Murray MacDonald:

‘…said to him virtually, well, that’s fine. Do what you want to do.’

When asked in the October 28th, 1994 interview whether it was made clear to Murray MacDonald that the settlement would cover both the civil and criminal proceedings,Malcolm replied:

‘I don’t think I said specifically, you know, civil and criminal, you know. I think — I think that it was clear to him that he wouldn’t proceed with anything, put it that way.’”

(exhibit is 863)

“According to the June 28th, 1994 statement, after speaking with Murray MacDonald, Malcolm MacDonald met with Bishop Larocque and Jacques Leduc. Jacques Leduc advised the bishop to pay the settlement amount. According to Malcolm MacDonald, he stated at that meeting that he, himself, was against this type of payment, however, since the diocese was putting up most of the money, Father MacDonald would reluctantly agree. Also according to a statement of June 20th, 1994, Malcolm MacDonald advised the bishop at this meeting that:

‘There would be no problem getting acquittal if charges were laid against the priest.’

Malcolm MacDonald then contacted Silmser and told him that the diocese was willing to pay.” (Exhibit 1155).

The Paperwork

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was asked by the diocese to draw the settlement agreement, and Jacques Leduc faxed him a sample agreement that Leduc had used in the past. The draft agreement that Malcolm MacDonald prepared included a clause stating that Silmser was undertaking not to take any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, against the parties to the agreement and that any actions in process would be terminated immediately.

According to Malcolm MacDonald’s statement in the October 28th, 1994 interview, he believed that all of that clause was from the precedent. The draft agreement was faxed to Leduc who made ‘minor cosmetic’ changes to it and sent it back to Malcolm MacDonald.” (exhibits are 863 and 263)

“A copy of the sample release provided to Malcolm MacDonald, which was originally written in French, and a copy of the English translation were filed jointly as a Exhibit 1 when Malcolm MacDonald plead guilty to the charge of attempt to obstruct justice. Crown Attorney Flanagan made the following comments when entering the documents into evidence:

‘Your Honour will see from the full release and undertaking not to disclose that paragraph 2 of that release, first of all, the release does not resemble the sample release that Your Honour has as Exhibit 1.’”

(Exhibit 1165)

The Cheque In Trust

“In the October 28th, 2004 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that Jacques Leduc sent him a cheque from the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall in the amount of $32,000, payable to Malcolm MacDonald in Trust, and he deposited the cheque into his trust account. When asked if Father MacDonald paid any portion of the settlement, Malcolm MacDonald replied:

‘He said he didn’t — he, not to my knowledge, he didn’t.’

When advised by the investigator that the indication from the bishop and the diocese was that Father MacDonald paid $5,000 of the settlement monies, Malcolm MacDonald stated that after the settlement was all over, into the new year, Father MacDonald came to him and stated that he had some monies owing to the diocese, and Malcolm MacDonald:

‘Transferred some cheques over to him.’”

(Exhibit 863)

Sean Adams

“Malcolm MacDonald indicated in the June 20th, 1994 statement that he arranged to have Sean Adams act as independent legal counsel for Silmser. On September 2nd, 1993, Adams and Silmser came to his office. He introduced the two and left the room. About one-half to three quarters of an hour later, they called him back in and said that they were ready to sign the full release and undertaking not to disclose, the certificate of  independent legal advice, and the acknowledgement; all documents which he had prepared.” (Exhibits 1155, 863, 263 and 264)

“Once the settlement documentation was signed, Malcolm MacDonald gave Sean Adams a letter dated September 2nd, 1993, enclosing a trust cheque payable to Silmser in the amount of $32,000. The letter advised that the cheque was to be held by Adams in escrow until the city police advised that Silmser had attended the police station and told the police that he did not want to proceed with any of the charges.” (exhibit is 268)

“On September 3rd, 1993, Malcolm MacDonald sent a letter addressed to Detective Sergeant Luc Brunet enclosing the direction signed by Silmser and witnessed by Sean Adams. The letter indicated Brunet had advised Adams that Silmser was to speak with Constable Sebalj personally and that Sebalj was away until sometime the following week. Malcolm MacDonald advised in the letter that Silmser would be available to meet with Sebalj who had stated that his file was diarised for that date and he was looking for an update. Constable Sebalj advised him that she was waiting to meet with Crown. Malcolm MacDonald asked that his client be summonsed and indicated he would escort hisclient as opposed his being ‘handcuffed, et cetera’. He also asked to be kept abreast of the situation.’ (Exhibits are 863 and 295).

[The chronology in this instance seems to convey the impression the discussion with Sebalj re handcuffs transpired on or after 03 September 1993.   According to Sebalj’ notes, and as is clear in the earlier reference in the ODE, it happened 23 August 1993. Sebalj’ notes of 23 August 1993 state: “t/c from Malcolm MacDonald.  States file diarized for this date. Looking for update.  Advised I was waiting to meet with the Corn.  Asked that his client be summonsed and would escort as opposed to being handcuffed etc. Suggested I would try to accommodate. Asked to be kept abreast of the situation.]

[With minor variations the next paras leading to Davis Silmser’s sex abuse allegations against Ken Seguin seem to repeat information previously covered] 

“According to a written statement prepared by Malcolm MacDonald on June 20th, 1994 at the request of the OPP, the question of compensation for Silmser was first raised in the early summer of 1993 in a call from Silmser to Monsignor McDougald and the matter was then discussed between Malcolm MacDonald, Father MacDonald and Jacques Leduc, at which time Malcolm was asked to contact Silmser to see what he was looking for in the way of  compensation.” (exhibit is 1155)

“According to Malcolm MacDonald’s statement in the October 28th, 1994, interview, the question of compensation being paid to Silmser was first raised in the early part of 1993.

He stated:

‘If I recall correctly, I think, Silmser called Monsignor McDougald and said, ‘I want an apology for starts and I guess he said, well, what do you mean then by for starts’ and he said to me, he implied that as far as I was concerned, that he wanted money.’”

(Reference is 863)

“In the October 28th, 1994, interview, Malcolm MacDonald indicated that sometime later that spring, after Silmser had been interviewed by the diocese, he was asked if he would contact Silmser.

Malcolm Macdonald stated that Jacques Leduc had reported back to him what had happened at the interview and that later the question of money arose again and Malcolm MacDonald was asked to contact Silmser, possibly by Monsignor McDougald, to find out what Silmser meant by an apology and what else he wanted.

In the November 18th, 1998, interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated he had attended a meeting with Jacques Leduc, Bishop Larocque and Monsignor McDougald, wherein they discussed a nuisance settlement. Malcolm MacDonald stated that Monsignor McDougald wondered how much Silmser wanted and it was agreed that Malcolm MacDonald would call and find out because Leduc said he couldn’t talk to Silmser and McDougald didn’t want to.” (Exhibits 863 and 1157)

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he called Silmser, explained that he was acting for Father MacDonald and that he had been asked by the diocese to find out what Silmser wanted. According to Malcolm MacDonald, Silmser advised that he had gone through a certain amount of money for treatment and needed further treatment. With respect to quantum, Malcolm MacDonald stated:

‘And that came to something like $22,000 he thought he needed, at least $12,000, he thought he needed $20,000, like, for compensation.’

Malcolm MacDonald stated that some time passed and he relayed that information to both Monsignor McDougald and Jacques Leduc.” (Exhibit 863)

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was asked by a representative of the diocese, either Monsignor McDougald or Mr. Leduc, to call Silmser again about the settlement. He further stated that before he called he met with Crown Attorney, Murray MacDonald and ‘explained the whole situation to him’. According to Malcolm MacDonald, Murray MacDonald:

‘…said to him virtually, well, that’s fine. Do what you want to do.’

When asked in the October 28th, 1994 interview whether it was made clear to Murray MacDonald that the settlement would cover both the civil and criminal proceedings,Malcolm replied:

‘I don’t think I said specifically, you know, civil and criminal, you know. I think — I think that it was clear to him that he wouldn’t proceed with anything, put it that way.’”

(exhibit is 863)

“According to the June 28th, 1994 statement, after speaking with Murray MacDonald, Malcolm MacDonald met with Bishop Larocque and Jacques Leduc. Jacques Leduc advised the bishop to pay the settlement amount.

According to Malcolm MacDonald, he stated at that meeting that he, himself, was against this type of payment, however, since the diocese was putting up most of the money, Father MacDonald would reluctantly agree.

Also according to a statement of June 20th, 1994, Malcolm MacDonald advised the bishop at this meeting that:

‘There would be no problem getting acquittal if charges were laid against the priest.’

Malcolm MacDonald then contacted Silmser and told him that the diocese was willing to pay.” (Exhibit 1155)

“In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was asked by the diocese to draw the settlement agreement, and Jacques Leduc faxed him a sample agreement that Leduc had used in the past. The draft agreement that Malcolm MacDonald prepared included a clause stating that Silmser was undertaking not to take any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, against the parties to the agreement and that any actions in process would be terminated immediately.

According to Malcolm MacDonald’s statement in the October 28th, 1994 interview, he believed that all of that clause was from the precedent. The draft agreement was faxed to Leduc who made ‘minor cosmetic’ changes to it and sent it back to Malcolm MacDonald.”  (exhibits are 863 and 263)

“A copy of the sample release provided to Malcolm MacDonald, which was originally written in French, and a copy of the English translation were filed jointly as a Exhibit 1 when Malcolm MacDonald plead guilty to the charge of attempt to obstruct justice. Crown Attorney Flanagan made the following comments when entering the documents into evidence:

‘Your Honour will see from the full release and undertaking not to disclose that paragraph 2 of that release, first of all, the release does not resemble the sample release that Your Honour has as Exhibit 1.’”

(Exhibit 1165)

“In the October 28th, 2004 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that Jacques Leduc sent him a cheque from the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall in the amount of $32,000, payable to Malcolm MacDonald in Trust, and he deposited the cheque into his trust account. When asked if Father MacDonald paid any portion of the settlement, Malcolm MacDonald replied:

‘He said he didn’t — he, not to my knowledge, he didn’t.’

When advised by the investigator that the indication from the bishop and the diocese was that Father MacDonald paid $5,000 of the settlement monies, Malcolm MacDonald stated that after the settlement was all over, into the new year, Father MacDonald came to him and stated that he had some monies owing to the diocese, and Malcolm MacDonald:

‘Transferred some cheques over to him.’”

(Exhibit 863)

“Malcolm MacDonald indicated in the June 20th, 1994 statement that he arranged to have Sean Adams act as independent legal counsel for Silmser. On September 2nd, 1993, Adams and Silmser came to his office. He introduced the two and left the room. About one-half to three quarters of an hour later, they called him back in and said that they were ready to sign the full release and undertaking not to disclose, the certificate of independent legal advice, and the acknowledgement; all documents which he had prepared.” (Exhibits 1155, 863, 263 and 264)

“Once the settlement documentation was signed, Malcolm MacDonald gave Sean Adams a letter dated September 2nd, 1993, enclosing a trust cheque payable to Silmser in the amount of $32,000. The letter advised that the cheque was to be held by Adams in escrow until the city police advised that Silmser had attended the police station and told the police that he did not want to proceed with any of the charges.” (Exhibit is 268)

“On September 3rd, 1993, Malcolm MacDonald sent a letter addressed to Detective Sergeant Luc Brunet enclosing the direction signed by Silmser and witnessed by Sean Adams.

The letter indicated Brunet had advised Adams that Silmser was to speak with Constable Sebalj personally and that Sebalj was away until sometime the following week. Malcolm MacDonald advised in the letter that Silmser would be available to meet with Sebalj anytime she wanted to meet him. The direction signed by Silmser indicated that he had received a civil settlement to his satisfaction and received independent legal advice before accepting the settlement.

In the direction Silmser indicated that he no longer wanted to proceed further with criminal charges. He requested that police close the file and stop further proceedings. ( Exhibit 299 and 266A)

David Silmser Sex Abuse Allegations Against Ken Seguin

On December 21st, 1993, Detective Constables Millar and MacDonald of the OPP Lancaster detachment interviewed Malcolm MacDonald with respect to Ken Seguin’s death on November 25th, 1993. In a signed statement, dated December 21st, 1993 Malcolm MacDonald indicated that he had spoken to Ken Seguin about the Father MacDonald and Silmser matter. In the October 28th, 1994 interview, Malcolm MacDonald stated that he was acting for Ken Seguin before his death and acted for his estate following his death. (Exhibit 973and 863)

In the December 21st, 1993 statement Malcolm MacDonald wrote that he had been advised by Ken Seguin in January 1993 that Silmser had called him and made “certain allegations.” Ken Seguin advised Malcolm MacDonald of further calls from Silmser in February, August, and September 1993.

According to the December 21st, 1993 statement Ken Seguin approached Malcolm MacDonald on November 15th, 1993 and advised that Silmser had called him that morning. Malcolm MacDonald requested that Ken Seguin provide him with documentation, “as to his story,” and to document the times he received calls from Silmser. Ken Seguin provided him with documentation. (Exhibit 973)

Malcolm MacDonald stated in the December 21st, 1993 statement that he was trying to convince Ken Seguin to lay charges against Silmser for extortion or to tell his employer about Silmser. In the afternoon of November 15th, 1993 Malcolm MacDonald telephoned Silmser who advised him that he wanted money and that if he didn’t get it he would go to the Ministry with a complaint.

Malcolm advised he would get back to him at the end of the week. (Exhibit 973)

On November 19th, 1993 according to the December 21st, 1993 statement, Malcolm MacDonald spoke to Silmser and they discussed the amount of $10,000 per year for 10 or 20 years. On the Monday before Ken Seguin’s death, Malcolm MacDonald met with Ken Seguin and discussed the matter. He advised that the dollar figure proposed by Silmser was out of the question and that Ken Seguin wouldn’t lose anything if he fought it.

He spoke to Ken Seguin again the Wednesday before his death. Malcolm MacDonald learned of Ken Seguin’s death late Thursday afternoon. He received a call from Silmser on Friday morning asking about the settlement and advised him that Ken Seguin was dead. (Exhibit 973)

Allegations of Obstruction of Justice Against Malcolm MacDonald

In 1994, OPP Detective Inspector Tim Smith and Detective Constable Mike Fagan commenced an investigation into allegations of obstruction of justice in relation to the settlement with Silmser. On October 28th, 1994 Detective Inspector Smith and Detective Constable Fagan interviewed Malcolm MacDonald regarding his role in the settlement. (Exhibits 1164 and 863)

On September 12th, 1995 Malcolm MacDonald plead guilty to the offence of unlawfully attempting to obstruct justice, Section 139(2) of the Criminal Code, by arranging for a”monetary payment to Silmser in order to dissuade him from participating in the Father MacDonald investigation. The Crown was represented by Curt Flanagan and MalcolmMacDonald was represented by R. Wakefield.

After hearing submissions on the joint position as to sentence, the presiding judge, the Honourable Mr. Justice Brian Lennox, granted Malcolm MacDonald an absolutedischarge and consequently no conviction was registered against him. (Exhibit 1165)

Sex Abuse Allegations Against Malcolm MacDonald

On February 7th, 1997 OPP Detective Constables Cathy Bell and Dan Anthony interviewed Ron Leroux. At that time, Leroux alleged that Malcolm MacDonald was part of a “clan” of paedophiles who would meet at various locations including Malcolm MacDonald’s summer residence on Stanley Island and in Fort Lauderdale.

He also alleged that Malcolm MacDonald had taken nude photographs of minors and that Malcolm MacDonald kept the photographs at his office. (Exhibit 572A)

On September 30th, 1997 OPP Detective Constable Steve Seguin and Joe Dupuis interviewed C-5. C-5 alleged that when he was approximately 12 or 13 years of age, Ken Seguin had sexually abused him. He alleged that Seguin had introduced him to Malcolm MacDonald when he was 13 or 14 and that Malcolm MacDonald had also sexually abused him. He further alleged that Malcolm MacDonald bought him cocaine, took nude pictures of him, and that C-5 “found boys” for him. (Exhibit 1166)

On February 3rd, 1998 OPP Detective Constables Don Genier and Steven Seguin interviewed C-10. He alleged that Ken Seguin had sexually abused him and that when he had needed a lawyer, Seguin told him to see Malcolm MacDonald. He alleged that when he was between 15 and 17 years of age, Malcolm MacDonald had sexually abused him in MacDonald’s office located on the third floor of the Criminal Courtbuilding. (Exhibit 377)

On December 16th, 1998 OPP Detective Constables Don Genier and Steve Seguin interviewed C-21. He alleged that Jean- Luc Leblanc had sexually abused him when he was between 11 and 15 years of age. He also alleged that Malcolm MacDonald had sexually assaulted him when he was in Grade 8 at a cottage owned by Leblanc’s parents in Quebec. (Exhibit 1162)

Malcolm MacDonald Charged.  Died.

On March 11th, 1999 as part of OPP Project Truth investigation, Malcolm MacDonald was charged with indecent assault and gross indecency against C-5 and with indecent assault against C-10. (Exhibit 390 and 1156)

On December 23rd, 1999 Malcolm MacDonald died of a cardiovascular disease in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. (exhibit is 1160)

On January 11th, 2000 the Crown withdrew all charges against Malcolm MacDonald. The charges had been scheduled to proceed to a preliminary inquiry on January 17th, 2000. (Exhibit 1158)

In 2002, C-10 was involved in litigation against the estate of Angus Malcolm MacDonald. ((Exhibit 1159)

_________________________________

02 August 2008:  Canadian bishops opposed settlement: Urged local bishop not to approve it