Sexual violence | 29% of files rejected

“All I wanted through all of my efforts was to be heard, recognized and validated. »

Victim of a sexual assault, Marie* rather felt that she “bothered” the Longueuil investigator and prosecutor assigned to her case, that she was “the annoying one” who asked questions. No charges were ultimately brought against her attacker, although the investigator and prosecutor on file assured her that they believed her.

“I found it incredibly violent with people who invalidate you and make you feel guilty,” says Marie, who works in the field of mental health.

The police officer told him from the outset: “you know, these are really serious consequences of having criminal charges.”

” And me ? My consequences for me? », says Marie, who found herself in a crisis center after the attack. Three healthcare professionals attested to severe post-traumatic shock with suicidal ideation and major depressive disorder. She still has panic attacks regularly, two years after the attack.

Marie is far from being the only one to see her case not accepted by the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions (DPCP).

According to an unpublished compilation produced by the DPCP at the request of The Press29% of the 33,919 requests to initiate proceedings for sexual violence offenses were not authorized by prosecutors in Quebec between 1^er April 2022 and March 31, 2023. Data to be interpreted with caution, affirms the DPCP, because their registration “must be done manually” in the computer systems, and therefore “certain files may not have been recorded correctly”.

Burden of proof

In Quebec, when a victim files a complaint with the police, an investigation is carried out. The case is then handed over to a prosecutor, who must decide whether or not to file charges.

In sexual assault cases, different factors can lead a prosecutor to file charges or not. There is in particular the question of the “burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt” and the “reasonable prospect of conviction”.

Even if the prosecutor is “convinced that the sexual assault took place”, he may “not be convinced of being capable of proving it”, explains the former chief judge of the Court of Quebec Élizabeth Corte, who co-chaired the Committee of Experts on Support for Victims of Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence which produced the report Rebuilding trustin 2020.

Knowing this, how should we interpret this rate of 29% of complaints for sexual violence rejected, therefore 71% upheld? Especially since this rate is lower than that of complaints not upheld for all crimes during the same period (33%), according to DPCP data. “I don’t find it bad […] It’s already been more dramatic than that,” says Laval University professor Julie Desrosiers, who also co-chaired the committee that led to the report. Rebuilding truste.

This seems to be “an improvement, but that doesn’t mean it’s the best we can do,” adds Élizabeth Corte.

Professor in the legal sciences department of the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM), Rachel Chagnon believes that a “big change” has been made by the DPCP in recent years. According to her, prosecutors today are “less cautious” about moving forward with charges.

Specialized courts have been created in 16 regions of Quebec. The government has given itself until 2026 to implement them in all judicial districts in the province.

That said, criminal law has not changed, recalls professor at the faculty of law at Laval University Louise Langevin. “The presumption of innocence and the rules of criminal law continue to apply,” notes this specialist in violence against women. We may have “set expectations too high” for certain victims.

Author of the work File a complaint, director and postdoctoral researcher at Concordia University, Léa Clermont-Dion says she “understands the great dissatisfaction of certain victims whose complaints are not upheld”. For her, we should “better explain to them the principles of criminal law”.

26 recommendations carried out

At the DPCP office, it is explained that “no target can be validly set in relation to the number of authorized files”. We assure that each file “is studied with rigor and impartiality”, that the decisions “are based on an objective analysis of legal principles based on the facts revealed by the evidence collected”. In addition to analyzing the “reasonable prospect of conviction,” prosecutors must also evaluate “the desirability of prosecuting in the public interest.” The DPCP wishes to clarify that “the fact that a file is refused does not mean that the victim is lying or did not experience the events at the heart of their denunciation”.

The DPCP indicates that since the submission of the report Rebuilding truste, 26 of the 46 recommendations concerning it have been implemented. Tools have been made available to prosecutors to “popularize sometimes complex legal concepts”.

Léa Clermont-Dion affirms that Quebec has taken giant steps since the report was submitted Rebuilding trust. However, certain elements remain to be improved, including “sustaining the training of the various stakeholders”. We should also better “talk about other options” to victims, such as the services of IVAC, Equijustice and resources in harassment intervention and prevention offices at universities, in particular.

Julie Desrosiers also affirms that the progress made in five years is “tremendous”, but that we are at the stage where it must be put into practice and consolidated. “People are impatient, but it’s only just been implemented. Changes need to be made,” she emphasizes.

“I just wanted him to end it”

In the judicial district of Longueuil, where Marie’s attack occurred (like that of Rose, in the next tab), there is still no specialized court.

Marie was attacked by a friend in a context of “sexual coercion”. He often let her know that he would like them to be more than friends. He touched her inappropriately and then blamed it on the alcohol he had consumed. She had already confided to him that she had been the victim of sexual abuse during childhood and that her reflex was to “freeze”, to “dissociate”.

One day, she showed up at his house, “vulnerable”, after having “argued very loudly” with her partner.

“He knew my traumatic past, he knew that I could dissociate, freeze,” she says. And that’s what happened that day. He took advantage of her vulnerability to attack her. She froze.

“I just wanted him to end it,” she explains to The Press. I have never consented. »

The prosecutor concluded that there was a “sincere but erroneous belief in consent” on the part of the attacker and chose not to lay charges. She assured Marie that she believed her, but that she did not have a “reasonable prospect of conviction.”

During her investigation, the policewoman interviewed friends of the man suspected of having attacked Marie, but never the suspect. “How can the prosecutor conclude that there was sincere but erroneous knowledge of consent without having spoken to him? », asks Marie.

Marie filed a police report three weeks after the attack. With hindsight, she would have made her statement later, accompanied by a worker specializing in sexual violence. Because details came back to her months later, while she was in psychotherapy. “I didn’t know we had a one shot. When you give your statement, you can’t come back to it afterwards,” she laments.

The State has set the bar high with Rebuilding trust : “We said: “go ahead, go ahead”, but behind that, the system doesn’t follow,” says Marie. This requires legislative changes, she believes, as in Spain, which now recognizes that the victim’s will is sometimes canceled by their state of astonishment and that some women submit to avoid greater violence.

Beyond the courts

Co-founder of Quebec against sexual violence, Mélanie Lemay emphasizes that the report Rebuilding trust recommended “better support for victims in all areas of law”, in particular family law, housing law and youth protection. M^me Lemay deplores that the specialized courts “restrict the question of aid and support to a criminal question which leads to filing a complaint with the police”. According to her, because everything is concentrated around the specialized court, “it’s as if everything falls apart when your complaint is not upheld”.

Being told “we believe you, but we won’t go any further, it’s sad but it’s not scandalous,” adds Professor Rachel Chagnon, from UQAM. “Collectively and socially we should continue to think about other avenues to allow victims to obtain a certain sense of justice,” she explains. But it’s something victims will always face even in the best of circumstances. »

Similar story from Julie Desrosiers, of Laval University: “The important thing is that we […] improves support and that we are able to have a system which, even when the victim does not necessarily agree with the result […] so that she feels like she has been fully considered.” Because without good communication, says Julie Desrosiers, what victims retain “is the emotion of pain”.

After the DPCP refused to initiate criminal proceedings, Marie chose civil proceedings, because above all she wants her attacker to “take responsibility” and “go to therapy” to avoid repeat offenses.

* His first name is fictitious, his story is not.

To read tomorrow: Juripop’s results