Jacques Delisle would be convicted if there was a second trial, pleads the Crown

The public prosecutor destroyed essential evidence that could have acquitted Jacques Delisle, his lawyer argues, to which the Crown replies that the ex-judge would at the very least be convicted of homicide if there were to be a second court case.

• Read also: Will former judge Jacques Delisle have to undergo a new trial?

The long saga of former judge Jacques Delisle continued Tuesday at the Quebec City courthouse, while the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions (DPCP) challenged before the Court of Appeal the stay of proceedings pronounced in last April to the 87-year-old man.

The Superior Court then considered that the state pathologist had shown “unacceptable negligence” during the autopsy of the deceased, found dead with a bullet in the head. He would not have sufficiently documented the trajectory of the projectile in the brain, which he did not preserve in formaldehyde.

No offense to the experts who have criticized the work of the state pathologist, M^e François Godin defended tooth and nail the work of his pathologist.

During the autopsy, the D^r André Bourgault examined the brain, cut it up and took sections, in addition to taking photographs and x-rays of the skull. He also studied the entry wound and the stain in the hand of the deceased, among other things.

“Looking at everything Bourgault has done […] Bourgault documented the trajectory. Do we have the certain trajectory? No. But does he have to have the perfect trajectory? I submit to you that no, ”he argued.

Even if the brain was still available, even if the trajectory had been determined with precision, these elements – essential in the eyes of the defence, which maintains that a shot given at 90 degrees as well as a ricochet of the projectile in the brain make it possible suicide – would not rule out homicide, tranche M^e Godin.

“None of the experts excludes homicide”, insists the prosecutor.

He incriminates himself

M^e Godin also recalled that Jacques Delisle incriminated himself in an affidavit signed by him in 2015, in which he declared that he had helped his wife to end her life by providing her, at her request, with a loaded weapon.

“He admits a crime which constitutes a lesser offense and included in the offense of murder, namely negligent homicide […] It brings minimally a conviction on a homicide”, he ruled, qualifying the current stay of proceedings of “disguised acquittal”.

Moreover, the Crown considers that a possible second trial could not be inexorably unfair, as stipulated by the trial court, since the autopsy of Dr.^r Bourgault was sufficiently documented to allow him to defend himself.

As proof, experts were able to issue “opinions favorable to the defense and this, based on the expertise of D^r Bourgault”, raised M^e Godin

“How could a trial prove inexorably unfair, if the accused can defend himself with experts, thanks to the work of Bourgault? […] We are going to stop the procedures when he is advantaged by this fact?”, he questioned.

Deprived of essential evidence

This scenario is insufficient according to Jacques Delisle’s lawyer, who believes that his client was deprived of evidence which, perhaps, could have established his innocence.

“It is unacceptable that the accused is deprived of a certainty to which he was entitled”, denounced Mr.^e Jacques Larochelle, who insists that the shooting angle and the trajectory have been at the heart of this affair since the very beginning.

“There, nothing and no one will be able to demonstrate the trajectory with certainty”, summarized M^e Larochelle, criticizing in passing the competence of a jury of ordinary citizens to process and analyze such complex scientific and technical evidence.

To the Crown who asserted that it would take a “succession of extraordinary events” to make suicide possible, Mrs.^e Larochelle retorts that it was she who had the obligation to propose a scenario, a trajectory and a shooting angle which exclude suicide.

The Crown wants a trial

Believing that there had been no serious fault and that Jacques Delisle was not deprived of a full and complete defence, the public prosecutor’s office requests that the stay of proceedings be annulled – the “most draconian remedy” applied to the “most serious crime of the Criminal Code” – so that the second trial could take place.

M^e Jacques Larochelle is campaigning for his part to maintain the stay of proceedings. If the Court of Appeal were to grant the Crown’s request, he already intends to present other arguments before the Superior Court with the aim of ordering a stay of proceedings.

First Judge in Canada

Recall that former judge Jacques Delisle made history in 2012 by becoming the first judge in Canada to be accused and convicted of murder. After unsuccessful appeal attempts and claiming to be the victim of a miscarriage of justice, the octogenarian filed a request for ministerial review in Ottawa.

After six years of investigation, Justice Minister David Lametti ordered a new trial, saying he was convinced that a possible miscarriage of justice had been committed. Jacques Delisle regained his freedom in April 2021, pending his second trial. However, the latter did not take place since it benefited from a stay of proceedings, a year later.

Jacques Delisle, who has been free of all charges since, was not present at the Court of Appeal on Tuesday. His lawyer said he and his family likely followed the hearing by videoconference.