The Court of Appeal has just quashed the acquittal verdicts rendered in 2020 in favor of Raphaël Lévesque, the leader of Atalante, who had burst into the offices of VICE to hold an award ceremony satire.
On May 23, 2018, Raphaël Lévesque, armed with a bouquet of flowers, showed up alone at the gates of VICE Media Quebec.
Seeing this friendly-looking visitor, an employee unlocks the front door electronically. Six or seven of his acolytes, hitherto hidden, then burst into the premises of the popular media.
Except for Raphaël Lévesque who wears sunglasses, all the others wear masks and a sweater bearing the image of the Atalante movement, which describes itself as a revolutionary, nationalist and independentist group, is it summarized in the judgment of the Court of call unveiled on Tuesday.
Set to the music of the American game show “The Price is Right”, they throw clown noses and leaflets in the premises, under the dumbfounded eyes of the employees.
Then, Lévesque presents journalist Simon Coutu with a satirical trophy — for an article he wrote about the group 5 days earlier — on which it is written “Média Poubelle 2018” and says to him: “a big thank you from the victims of the war that you are trying to leave”.
For these “75 seconds of disorder”, he was charged with 4 criminal offenses, but at the end of his trial, he was acquitted by Judge Joëlle Roy of the Court of Quebec on the whole line.
The Crown appealed these verdicts.
The Court of Appeal disagrees with Judge Roy on several aspects, including these.
First, a break and enter is not apologetic because it took place “peacefully”: that there was no shouting or threats does not change the commission of the Offense, writes the Court of Appeal. In addition, the exercise of freedom of expression does not allow entry into a private place either.
As for the wrongdoing, all its ingredients are gathered here, judges the Court. The sudden and noisy appearance of the group prevented the employees from fully enjoying their workplace, the music and the leaflets which were thrown everywhere prevented them from working.
In short, Raphaël Lévesque did indeed “interrupt, prevent or hinder the legitimate enjoyment or exploitation of property”, which is one of the definitions of the crime of “mischief”.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the two crimes were committed, namely mischief and breaking and entering, but as they were committed in the same “criminal transaction” and the “same time continuum” and that the law prevents multiple convictions for the same act, it orders a stay of proceedings for the charge of mischief.
There remains therefore the entry by infraction. The Court thus referred the case to the Court of Quebec, which would decide on the sentence to impose on Raphaël Lévesque.