BishopAccountability.org
	Leduc Persuaded Bishop to Agree to $32,000 Payout; By Trevor Pritchard Standard-Freeholder July 16, 2008 http://www.standard-freeholder.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1115919 The one-time lawyer for the Alexandria- Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese had to persuade former bishop Eugene LaRocque to agree to a $32,000 settlement with a man who'd accused a city priest of sexual abuse, the Cornwall Public Inquiry heard Tuesday. Jacques Leduc signed off on a 1994 statement in which he said LaRocque was initially "adamant against settling" with David Silmser, because the church would appear to be covering up his allegations against Rev. Charles MacDonald. "I think the arguments I put forth (to convince LaRocque) were persuasive," Leduc, 57, told the inquiry yesterday. "They were put forth in a very straightforward and unambiguous matter." Silmser went to police in December 1992, alleging MacDonald had sexually abused him when he was an altar boy at St. Columban's Church in Cornwall during the 1960s and 1970s. In September 1993, Silmser accepted a $32,000 payout from the diocese. One of the conditions of the settlement was that Silmser not pursue any further criminal or civil action against MacDonald. In Leduc's 1994 statement -which he cowrote with another attorney in the face of a lawsuit involving the diocese -Leduc said he left an Aug. 25, 1993 meeting with LaRocque feeling "very angry" after the bishop refused to settle with Silmser. "Settling represented a good opportunity to resolve a messy situation, to protect the reputation of the priest, which would be destroyed by any legal proceedings, regardless of his innocence," wrote Leduc. Also at the meeting was Malcolm MacDonald, Charles MacDonald's lawyer. According to his statement, Leduc made it clear to both LaRocque and Malcolm MacDonald that any settlement could not legally affect Silmser's right to pursue criminal charges. Nevertheless, Leduc told the inquiry -which is probing how institutions like the diocese handled historical sexual abuse allegations -he hoped the settlement would dissuade Silmser from taking that step. "It would be very naive to (not) hope that it would resolve all matters, including criminal issues," he said. "And at this time there were no charges. So that was my hope, yes." Leduc, Malcolm MacDonald, and LaRocque met again on Sept. 1, and the two attorneys managed to convince the bishop the settlement would not be seen as "hush money." The diocese would pay Silmser $27,000, while another $5,000 would come out of Charles MacDonald's pocket. Commission lawyer Karen Jones suggested Leduc might have gone farther than simply reasoning with LaRocque. "Were you trying to make it so the bishop had no choice in the matter?" asked Jones. "The bishop was a very autonomous person," said Leduc. "I would never say that Bishop LaRocque would be coerced into making any such decision." After LaRocque agreed, Leduc said he told Malcolm MacDonald -who had little experience drawing up such settlements - that the final language should make no reference to the criminal matter. "You can't impede the criminal process," Leduc told Jones. "The bishop was very clear and adamant on that point throughout." However, Malcolm MacDonald's final draft of the settlement -signed by both Silmser and city attorney Sean Adams - included a clause prohibiting Silmser from pursuing any criminal charges against Charles MacDonald. According to his 1994 statement, Leduc received the settlement in a sealed envelope and passed it along to the diocese without opening it -an oversight, he wrote, that was "clearly a serious mistake on my part." Malcolm MacDonald would plead guilty in September 1995 to one count of obstructing justice. He received an absolute discharge one month later. In the months before the diocese settled with Silmser, Leduc learned from another priest, Msgr. Donald MacDougald, that there were other complaints of unwanted "homosexual advances" involving Charles MacDonald. Leduc testified he'd asked LaRocque about Charles MacDonald's "history" in the diocese, but couldn't recall telling the bishop about the allegations before convincing him to settle with Silmser. Jones asked if that knowledge might have affected LaRocque's decision. "I'm not sure how the bishop would have reacted to that," said Leduc. "Is it possible you didn't share that information, in hopes of getting the settlement finalized?" asked Jones. "Definitely not," said Leduc. Leduc also testified that he kept few notes of his involvement with the settlement and never opened a file on the negotiations. As for Silmser, Leduc said he'd only met him face-to-face once -during a February 1993 meeting that also involved MacDougald and Rev. Denis Vaillancourt, the diocesan chancellor. The diocese's protocol at the time was to confront priests who'd been accused of sexual abuse, and Leduc said that before doing that, it was important to speak with Silmser. "To do that in a proper way, I think we needed some details (from him)," said Leduc. While Cornwall police never charged Charles MacDonald, in 1996 the OPP laid seven charges against the priest involving three complainants. An additional eight abuse charges were tacked on two years later. A judge stayed all the charges in 2002 after ruling the matter had taken too long to come to trial. Charles MacDonald has always maintained his innocence. Leduc is scheduled to return to the stand when the inquiry resumes today. - - - Timeline: Leduc and the settlement December 1992:Leduc learns that David Silmser has made a sexual abuse allegation against Rev. Charles MacDonald, a priest with the Alexandria- Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese Feb. 9, 1993:Leduc and two diocesan representatives meet with Silmser. Although Silmser refuses to get into details about the abuse, Leduc says he felt he was either "telling the truth or was one of the best actors possible." February-August 1993:Leduc learns from Malcolm MacDonald, Charles MacDonald's lawyer, that Cornwall police have launched a criminal investigation. Leduc also learns from Msgr. Donald MacDougald of other abuse complaints against Charles MacDonald. Aug. 25, 1993:Leduc and Malcolm MacDonald meet with Bishop Eugene LaRocque to discuss a possible out-of-court settlement with Silmser. LaRocque was "adamant" there would be no settlement, and Leduc leaves the meeting feeling angry that the bishop was passing up "a good opportunity to resolve a messy situation." Sept. 1, 1993:The three meet again, after Malcolm MacDonald tells Leduc the police don't have enough evidence to charge Charles MacDonald. LaRocque agrees to the settlement - $27,000 from the diocese, and $5,000 from Charles MacDonald. Leduc tells Malcolm MacDonald not to include any language about the criminal matters in the final documents. Sept. 3, 1993:Silmser signs the agreement, which contains a clause forbidding him from pursuing any criminal charges against Charles MacDonald. Leduc turns over the agreement to the diocese without checking the language - "clearly a serious mistake on my part." Jan. 7, 1994:Media outlets begin reporting on the $32,000 settlement. Sept. 12, 1995:Malcolm MacDonald pleads guilty to one count of obstructing justice. October 11, 1995:MacDonald is given an absolute discharge. (Source: 1994 Leduc statement)
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.