Normandeau and his co-defendants allege the judgment in Jordan
Photo Didier Debusschere
Friday, December 15, 2017 17:41
Friday, December 15, 2017 17:41
Look at this article
Nathalie Normandeau and his five co-defendants invoke the stop Jordan and then the management “chaotic” of the Crown and of the UPAC in the hope of aborting the trial.
The request for stay of proceedings “Jordan”, announced by the defense at the end of the month of October, has been officially sent to the registry of the Court of Québec in the late afternoon on Friday.
The document of 38 pages has been served to the Crown and to the judge André Perreault by Charles Levasseur, a lawyer of France Michaud, former ceo of engineering consulting firm ROCHE. The other defendants, including Ms. Normandeau, will join automatically to the procedure.
“The applicant submits that she is a victim of the management chaotic by the public ministry of the record in the present case (and) that she is also a victim of the management chaotic by the UPAC of the evidence gathered during the investigation. Moreover, the process of disclosure of evidence in connection with investigations relating to leaks to the UPAC, an aspect which is relevant to the merits of the case, is still in progress”, can we read.
Ceiling of 18 months or 30 months?
The defence invokes unreasonable delay and believes that the rule of a ceiling of 18 months between indictment and the conclusion of actual or anticipated litigation – should apply since the case will eventually be heard by the Court of Québec.
Originally, the trial had to take place before a judge and jury, the superior Court, where a ceiling of 30 months applies. The Crown had then filed an indictment direct, depriving the accused of their right to a preliminary investigation. Because of this maneuver, considered “strategic” by the defense, the accused have “réopté” for a trial before a judge alone in the Court of Québec.
The defense said that he has nothing to reproach himself
When the trial will begin in April, the 18-month time limit has been exceeded since the accused have been pinned by the UPAC in march 2016. A delay of 23 months and 20 days have elapsed since the filing of the charges. The defence believes that the Crown by its actions, is solely responsible for this situation. “Any conduct of the defence cannot ensure that sufficient time could be allocated”, it read.
The defense believes it does not have to “do the costs of the strategic choices of the police or the Crown.” If the public ministry “has seen too large, this is not her problem and she doesn’t have to pay the price,” adds it. “The applicant “submits that the repair minimum in the present case should consist of a judgment pure and simple procedures”.
Mrs Normandeau, and Michaud, as well as their co-accused (Marc-Yvan Côté, Bruno Lortie, Mario Martel François Roussy) are facing various counts of fraud, conspiracy, breach of trust and bribery of public officials.
Retrieved from the query
“The prosecution has never demonstrated that it had taken reasonable measures were available to prevent and address the problem before that the maximum time limit applicable is not exceeded.”
“The pursuit has caused a significant delay in filing an indictment direct late and unjustified, and, also, by challenging an application of réoption, a request that was granted in terms which are explicit enough by the superior Court of Quebec.”
“Although the evidence is voluminous, the case is not particularly complex. The case raises no point of law or complex.”
“The actions of the prosecution are the one and only reason that made it so that the applicant is at the stage of trial before a judge of a provincial Court without a preliminary investigation.”
* A petition filed by Charles Levasseur that is in the record of France Michaud, coaccusée of Nathalie Normandeau