The stepmother of the Granby girl, sentenced in 2021 to life in prison without the possibility of parole for 13 years for the kidnapping and second-degree murder of her 7-year-old stepdaughter, pleaded before the Court of Appeal on Tuesday to convince it to grant her a new trial.
Five years, four months and 25 days after the discovery of the naked, unconscious and ribboned little girl in her barricaded bedroom, the stepmother was playing her all to try to alleviate her responsibility in the tragedy. Her lawyer, Me Maxime Hébert-Lafontaine pleaded his case on Tuesday, under the gaze of the three judges of the Court of Appeal and the girl’s grandmother, present at the hearing.
This return to court culminated after long months of preparation. The pleadings of both parties presented before the Court of Appeal total 15,000 pages — eight copies of the Old Testament in pocket format.
The stepmother, whose identity is subject to a publication ban to protect the anonymity of her children, believes that there were numerous breaches of the investigation and trial. She is requesting that the trial be cancelled and a new one held or, failing that, a reduction in the sentence that would allow her to regain conditional release after 10 years.
“Abusive” search of cell phone
According to the appellant’s lawyer, the police violated his client’s constitutional rights by conducting an “abusive” search of her cell phone. The police, the appeal states, extracted 4,500 text messages, 6,800 images, some of them intimate, 274 videos and 3,500 other files related to the geolocation, emails, calls and browsing data of the mother-in-law.
“The State engaged in abusive execution” from the “early stages” of the investigation, deplored Mr.e Hébert-Lafontaine, and this, on the sole factual basis of a reported communication which took place between the father, now released on parole, and the child’s stepmother on the day of his death.
This is, however, the usual procedure, retorted the public prosecutor’s lawyer, M.e Frederique Le Colleter.
“When the police enter a house to carry out a search and seize letters, for example, they necessarily see all sorts of personal things that belong to the residents, but they only seize the letters. Extraction is a bit like that,” compared Me The Colleter. We will capture all the data in the phone, and then we will put a filter to obtain only what is targeted by the authorization.
Before or after the arrest?
The appeal also deplores the fact that the phone in question was searched before the mother-in-law was even arrested. In its eyes, the justice system had no reason to do so when it seized the cell phone.
“Indeed,” admitted Mr.e Le Colleter, her phone was seized at 12:01 p.m., while she was formally arrested at 12:15 p.m. However, she specified, the factual framework shows that following a conversation with the girl’s father, the police had, from 11:50 a.m., all the reasons in hand to arrest the stepmother.
The case law cited by the respondent teaches two conditions for procedures of this type: “The police must have acquired the grounds for arrest before proceeding with the seizure,” said Mr.e The Colleter, and secondly, the arrest must occur quickly. According to the generally accepted factual framework, this was the case here.”
The appeal accuses trial judge Louis Dionne of erring in admitting into evidence text messages dating back to November 2018 that were unrelated, according to Mr.e Hébert-Lafontaine, with the accusation and which were prejudicial to the mother-in-law. The judge, adds the appellant, should have given instructions to the jury concerning the treatment of this evidence, which demonstrates both the appellant’s exasperation and her distress in the face of a family situation that had become out of control.
The judges seemed unconvinced of the merits of this argument.
“It’s as if you’re inviting us to consider these text messages in isolation from each other,” he retorted. one of the three judges, Michel Beaupré, while when we read them up to those of the fateful morning, it is as if it were a climaxa progression. It can be useful for understanding the whole work.
A change of location “without the knowledge” of the parties
The change in the location of the trial, a change originally made at the request of the defence, also occupied the Court of Appeal on Tuesday. The appellant claims that the managing trial judge decreed that the trial would be held in Trois-Rivières “without the knowledge” of the parties.
A version that the respondent qualified on Tuesday, recalling that the judge had consulted the mother-in-law’s lawyer on this question three times – without ever obtaining an answer.
The appeal finally finds that the stepmother should have been charged with manslaughter rather than second-degree murder. According to the appellant, her intention in wrapping the girl from head to toe in duct tape was not to inflict injuries that could kill her, but to prevent her from escaping — “a legitimate purpose that was legitimate in itself,” Mr.e Hébert-Lafontaine.
“Putting the tape over the nose and mouth, for you, is that part of the kidnapping?” he asked. Judge François Doyon. I think we don’t need a doctorate to understand that this is dangerous.”
“It remains a form of sequestration at all times,” maintained the appellant’s lawyer. “The fact remains that the goal, the objective, is always the same: that she does not escape.”
The three judges who heard the appeal have taken their decision on the mother-in-law’s fate in the coming months.