BishopAccountability.org
	Cop at Centre of Cornwall Inquiry Appeals Contempt Convictions By Allison Jones The Canadian Press January 17, 2010 http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gkONzEw3YmfN7kiXJxrQBnJmFxTw TORONTO — The seven months a former police officer served in jail for refusing to testify at a public inquiry, largely of his own making, amounted to "cruel and unusual punishment," the man writes in appealing his contempt convictions. Perry Dunlop led a crusade for years in Cornwall, Ont., to root out pedophiles and his work sparked calls for a public inquiry. The Cornwall inquiry's official mandate was to examine institutional responses to historical claims of sexual abuse, but many were looking to the report, released in December, to once and for all debunk rumours of a pedophile ring. Commissioner G. Normand Glaude declined to do so in his more than 1600-page report. Dunlop, now living in Duncan, B.C., was called in September 2007 to testify at the inquiry. While he did appear several times, he refused to answer any questions. He was found guilty of civil contempt in November 2007 and sentenced to six months. He was then found guilty of criminal contempt in March 2008 and sentenced to a further 30 days in jail. The convictions are a "travesty" that must be overturned, Dunlop writes in documents filed with the Court of Appeal for Ontario. "I was targeted for cruel and unusual punishment to the point of excessive and prolonged isolated incarceration for speaking out to protect children and expose criminal activity within the justice system," Dunlop writes. "I am appealing also on the grounds that the sentences imposed on me were excessive, inhumane and constituted unlawful and illegal imprisonment." Dunlop's appeal is scheduled to be heard Monday, but he is self-represented and it's unclear whether he will attend in person. The Crown didn't notify Dunlop of the hearing date and attempts to reach him over the past week have not been fruitful, according to information in Dunlop's court file. If Dunlop is there Monday the appeal will be argued. If not, Dunlop will be contacted and given the choice of either setting a new hearing date or having it proceed in writing. There are no legal grounds to overturn the contempt findings because Dunlop has not given a lawful excuse for his refusal to testify, lawyers for the inquiry's commissioner and the Crown write in court documents. "While Mr. Dunlop may have concerns about giving evidence before the inquiry or doubts about the inquiry's effectiveness, they do not amount to lawful excuse," the commissioner's lawyers write. "Public inquiries have a long history in Canada and are an important part of our legal and political fabric." Dunlop's lawful excuse was that he was misled. Commission counsel originally told him they couldn't force him to testify, but later learned they could use an interprovincial summons to compel his testimony. Dunlop writes he was punished by the court for expressing his opinions, thoughts and beliefs, contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But the Crown calls Dunlop's "flagrant defiance" or the court order an "impermissible" attack. He shouldn't be permitted to justify his defiance under the charter because he didn't exercise his legal right to appeal the order, the Crown writes. As for the sentences, they were served in isolation because he is a former police officer, and were fit in the circumstances, the Crown and commissioner's lawyers write. "The punishment for contempt should serve as a warning to those who might be inclined to breach court orders," they write. "Our legal system is wounded when court orders are ignored." Dunlop has long maintained high-profile local officials were operating a pedophile ring in Cornwall and that there was a conspiracy by the government and the justice system to cover it up. His quest has earned him a loyal band of followers, but also much criticism. His refusal to hand over to the provincial police information he gleaned in his unsanctioned, off-hours investigation has been blamed for the failed prosecutions of several alleged child abusers. Dunlop began his pursuit in good faith, inquiry Commissioner G. Normand Glaude wrote in his report, but his distrust of public institutions eventually overwhelmed what was a genuine desire to help children.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.