Trial of the Metropolis attack | Another report on the attack would have remained secret

Has the Sûreté du Québec (SQ) produced a second secret report on the Metropolis attack? The lawyer for the survivors of the attack threw this stone into the pond on Monday, while the SQ demanded more time to “refresh the memory” of the police in order to enlighten the judge on the mysterious threats launched against Pauline Marois.

Posted yesterday at 4:02 p.m.

Louis-Samuel Perron

Louis-Samuel Perron
The Press

“We understood in the last few days, from informal conversations that we had, that there was a report that was commissioned before the executive report. This is information that is reported to us. I don’t have any more information,” said Mr.and Virginie Dufresne-Lemire Monday afternoon at the Montreal courthouse.

This is the first time that the existence of a possible second SQ report has been raised since the start of this trial with many twists and turns. “It would make sense because the report [exécutif] was requested four months after the events,” argued the plaintiffs’ lawyer. They are demanding at least $600,000 from the police forces. Lawyers for the SQ did not comment on this allegation before the judge.

Hidden from the public for 10 years, the content of the “executive” report was revealed to the public following a decision by judge Philippe Bélanger. The SQ indeed fought so that this report, which was very uncritical of the police force, was not filed in evidence.

During the legal proceedings, the SQ initially denied the existence of the “executive” report. A former SQ officer also admitted to having had the conclusions of this report dictated to him by the staff.

The Mystery of the Six Threats

The trial took an unexpected turn last week when Judge Bélanger exceptionally ordered the SQ to shed light on the six threats made against Pauline Marois on election day in 2012. No SQ witness was able to detail these threats yet “documented or otherwise recorded”, was surprised the judge. Even the author of the “executive” report did not remember.

Thus, Judge Bélanger calls for answers to these three questions: “What are the six threats in question? », « By whom were they investigated? and “To whom were they communicated?” »

A document making it possible to fully answer the judge’s questions has “unfortunately not been traced” by the SQ, indicated Mr.and Julien Bernard. However, the lawyer for the Attorney General of Quebec (PGQ) – who represents the SQ – told the judge that he “hoped” to answer these questions within “7 to 10 days”.

Memories to refresh

“I find it surprising that there is no document that recounts these threats and describes the steps that were taken, given that we have a report that mentions six threats investigated promptly,” said plaintiffs’ counsel.

I am not saying that there is no document on anything, I am saying that I do not have a document which answers all your questions. We want to make sure we have it all, and have the most complete picture. I am not saying that there is no document.

Mand Julien Bernard, lawyer for the Attorney General of Quebec

As the events date back 10 years, it will also be necessary to “refresh the memory” of several witnesses, even those who have already testified under oath before the judge, according to the PGQ.

The case was adjourned to May 9.


source site-61

Latest