Final arguments have been made in the Charles Lassonde murder trial regarding the alleged first-degree murder of Serge Boutin in Val-des-Sources in July 2021. Defense attorney Martin Latour challenged key witness Lana Dubois’s testimony, suggesting her motivations stemmed from her own issues with Boutin. In contrast, Crown prosecutor Stéphanie Landry emphasized witness accounts contradicting Lassonde’s claims. The trial now awaits jury deliberation, marking a pivotal moment in seeking justice for Boutin.
Final Arguments in the Charles Lassonde Murder Trial
The trial concerning Charles Lassonde’s alleged first-degree murder of Serge Boutin, which took place in Val-des-Sources in July 2021, is now reaching its concluding phase. On Monday, both the defense and prosecution presented their compelling arguments at the Sherbrooke courthouse regarding this tragic incident.
Charles Lassonde’s attorney, Me Martin Latour, initiated the defense’s case by expressing gratitude to the jury and acknowledging the diligent efforts of the court staff. He dedicated a significant portion of his argument to the testimony of Lana Dubois, an ex-partner of Lassonde and a key witness for the Crown. Dubois, having received a sentence of over four years for a related charge of manslaughter, chose to cooperate with authorities shortly before her own trial.
Contesting the Witness Testimony
During her testimony, Lana Dubois alleged that Lassonde had manipulated her feelings against the victim, Serge “Bibitte” Boutin. However, Me Latour challenged this narrative, suggesting that Dubois’s issues with Boutin stemmed from a past incident in which drugs she sold led to a fatal overdose of a man who turned out to be Boutin’s cousin. “She became paranoid, suspecting Serge was collaborating with law enforcement,” Latour argued, emphasizing that her fears did not originate from Lassonde.
Me Latour further scrutinized Dubois’s recounting of the night of the alleged murder. He claimed that her narrative contradicted itself, particularly regarding the details of Boutin’s attempted escape. Dubois stated that Boutin was struck during one of his attempts to flee, yet she admitted not witnessing the actual blow. Latour pointed out the inconsistencies in her account, arguing that her paranoia and dishonesty undermined her credibility. He passionately urged the jury to believe in his client’s innocence and requested an acquittal for the charges against him.
On the other side, Crown prosecutor Stéphanie Landry delivered her rebuttal with precision, utilizing a visual presentation to reinforce her points. She addressed the significant decision not to cross-examine Lassonde, citing the testimony of Lyne Royer, a neutral witness who observed the abduction from her apartment window. Royer described how Boutin was forcibly thrown into a vehicle, contradicting Lassonde’s claim that Boutin entered willingly.
Landry also highlighted the defense’s assertion that Dubois held the motive for the altercation, suggesting that Lassonde had influenced her feelings towards Boutin. She referenced the heated argument between Dubois and Lassonde just days prior to the incident, arguing that it was Lassonde who instilled resentment in Dubois against the victim. Furthermore, Landry questioned the plausibility of Lassonde’s version of events and pointed out the contradictions in his testimony regarding his intentions that night.
With both sides having presented their cases, the trial now awaits the jury’s deliberation, marking a critical moment in the pursuit of justice for Serge Boutin.