Major turnaround in the fifth week of the trial of Marc-André Grenon: almost 24 years later, the accused admitted on Wednesday to having caused the death of Guylaine Potvin on April 28, 2000. The man, who did not present any defense, however, pleads that it was not premeditated.
The announcement of this recognition was made by the representative of the Crown, Mr.e Pierre-Alexandre Bernard, at the opening of the pleadings, in front of a crowded room at the Chicoutimi courthouse.
The noose had tightened in recent weeks around the accused. A forensic biologist notably came to explain that it was “hundreds of billions” of times more likely that the DNA found on the scene at the time belonged to Marc-André Grenon rather than to someone else.
The identification of the young woman’s murderer now resolved, the arguments of each party focused on the sequence of events on the evening of the crime on Wednesday. The result of a plan prepared in advance by Marc-André Grenon and aimed at satisfying sexual urges, according to the Crown, or the result of an altercation resulting from an attempted theft from Guylaine Potvin, according to the defense.
“The end justified the means”
The moment of the sexual assault allegedly committed by Marc-André Grenon on the young woman also took a central place in the debate, the murder being automatically classified as first degree if the death occurred immediately, detailed in jury Me Pierre-Alexandre Bernard.
Thus, according to the prosecution’s hypothesis, Guylaine Potvin would have been surprised in the bedroom of her apartment in Jonquière while she was sleeping. “ [Marc-André Grenon] took advantage of Guylaine’s highly vulnerable situation to sneakily attack her, control and master her, to facilitate the perpetration of a sexual assault,” explained M.e Bernard.
A hypothesis supported, according to him, by the testimony of a forensic pathologist who came to explain that certain lesions found on the victim’s body had been caused while his heart was still beating.
But also by numerous clues left on Guylaine Potvin’s body by gestures “with blatant sexual connotations” that she suffered: the fact that she was found naked, the bite mark found on her breast, the use a box of condoms, among other things.
ARCHIVED PHOTO PROVIDED BY THE SÛRETÉ DU QUÉBEC
Guylaine Potvin
“Despite all the strength and determination that Guylaine was able to give, Marc-André Grenon succeeded in his project which was precisely to satisfy his sexual urges. And this, at all costs, even if the death of his victim were to result. For Marc-André Grenon, on the night of April 27 to 28, 2000, the end justified the means. »
Unpremeditated murder
For their part, Marc-André Grenon’s lawyers instead argued that the sexual assault could have taken place following Guylaine’s death, which would open the door to a charge of unpremeditated murder.
“There is no proof that Guylaine Potvin was alive at the time that Marc-André Grenon had sexual contact with her,” explained Mr.e Karine Poliquin.
According to her, nothing in the evidence presented to the jury makes it possible to establish the course of what happened in the victim’s apartment, and even less the intentions that the accused had.
Marc-André Grenon did not know her, as confirmed by her friends and roommates, recalled Me Poliquin. He did not know how many people lived with her, and three days before, he had been arrested by the police in Chicoutimi while he was living in a shelter for homeless people.
According to Me Poliquin, Marc-André Grenon entered the apartment to steal, as demonstrated by the state of the first two rooms he found on his way: upside down and the drawers open. “But when he got to the last room, there was someone sleeping and he was surprised. He arrived in front of her. »
“There is more than one plausible theory about the sequence of events; but we will never know what really happened. However, to find the accused guilty, there must remain no reasonable doubt,” recalled Mr.e Poliquin about the charge of premeditated murder against his client.
A final meeting between the parties must take place Thursday morning before instructions are given to the jury for its deliberations, which should begin next week.