1.5 million embezzled from a research fund | Severe sentences for a family of fraudsters

A family of fraudsters who embezzled more than $1.5 million from a prostate cancer research fund through a sophisticated scheme committed “heinous” crimes, a judge says. Sylvie Dagenais and her clan were sentenced to severe sentences on Friday.

“The fraud is not only odious and shocking, it is immoral,” judge Mylène Grégoire said Friday morning at the Montreal courthouse. “Without this increasingly fierce greed, his children would certainly have a better future. [Elle et son mari] behaved like liars, fraudsters and manipulators,” continued the judge.

Sylvie Dagenais, the mastermind of this major fraud, was sentenced to 6 years in prison, while her husband Danny Edisbury received 4 years of detention. Their sons Francis and Carl Edisbury got away with two years of house arrest due to their secondary role.

The fraudsters will also have to repay all the stolen amounts otherwise they will return behind bars for a few years. Sylvie Dagenais and Danny Edisbury will have a dozen years after leaving prison to repay $1.2 million. The two sons will have to find around $260,000.

Sylvie Dagenais was the secretary to the head of the Urology Department of the CHUM and an eminent researcher in prostate cancer D^r Fred Saad. The 60-year-old woman had the “absolute” trust of the researcher. She controlled the fund’s activities from A to Z: hiring, schedules, approval of salaries and invoicing of customer accounts.

For years, Sylvie Dagenais and her husband abused this trust by freely dipping into this fund thanks to a “carefully elaborated fraudulent scheme”. First, the fraudulent secretary gave herself a double salary. Then, they set up a billing system to benefit Danny Edisbury’s business.

Believing themselves to be “invincible”, the fraudsters then included their sons Carl and Francis in their fraudulent schemes. The youngest, Francis, received $142,000 from the CHUM Research Center without ever working there. The other son collected fake overtime every week for five years.

It was only when the CHUM moved that the fraud was detected.

Judge Grégoire did not identify any mitigating factors with regard to the two parents. The aggravating factors are as numerous as they are important. The judge particularly notes that the victims of the fraud are real people suffering from cancer.

However, the judge rejected the Crown’s suggestion of an 8-year sentence for Sylvie Dagenais, instead agreeing with the defense’s proposal. In the case of the two sons, the lawyers had submitted a joint sentence suggestion to the judge.

M^e Sarah-Audrey Daigneault represented the public prosecutor. M^e Isabelle Lamarche defended the couple, while M^e Maxime St-Germain represented the sons.