Former police officer gets another 30 days for refusing to testify

The Canadian Press

September 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM EDT

TORONTO Former police officer Perry Dunlop has been sentenced to another 30 days behind bars for refusing to give evidence at an inquiry in Cornwall, Ont.

Mr. Dunlop was convicted of civil and criminal contempt of court charges for not providing testimony at a probe into the institutional response to allegations of a sexual abuse ring in Cornwall.

The Crown had been seeking a further three to six months in prison, while Mr. Dunlop wanted to be released immediately.

Mr. Dunlop was representing himself in court.

The former Cornwall officer began investigating the alleged ring on his own time in 1993.

Despite Mr. Dunlop's claims, police said they found no evidence of an organized ring.



Ottawa Mens, from Ottawa Canada's corruption Capital, Canada) wrote: Silence can be damming especially by a former police officer.
Perry Dunlop made spectacular allegations, none of which have been proven. It begs the question, why doesn't he want to testify? His lame excuses don't just lack credibility, they provide very good reasons as to why he should be jailed until he decides to testify.
Perry Dunlop's days in the spotlight are numbered.
If he testifies, and he can't back up his allegations, he faces ridicule, embarrassment and the loss of his "victim' status.
If Perry Dunlop refuses to testify, he can continue to claim that he is a victim of a corrupt system.
Odds are he will continue to chose jail to remain a hero than face humiliation.

He may be right generally about our justice system. Small towns in Ontario with their own police forces are breeding grounds for corruption. Local prosecutors frequently become adversarial and go along with criminal charges without any evidence simply for the purpose of destroying anyone who happens to be politically unpopular.
Take the Toronto Police, now they can decide the "costs of security" before a protest, that's right, only the rich will be able to afford to protest, and of course litigate or high a lawyer.
That takes us to our judicial system that has systemic flagrant abuse of judicial powers that again, creates endless injustice by banning those who criticize the judiciary from due process by insidious orders such as "vexatious litigant orders" "orders for security for costs" and "striking pleadings".
In the case of Perry Dunlop, he cant make those claims, he doesn't want his day in court.

Mr. Dunlop and Ontario have been fortunate to have as commissioner, Justice Norman Glaude who is pretty much devoid of any complaints. He used to be on the board for investigating police complaints and has a history of appropriate actions against a judge that he supervised.