Lawyers for former national ski coach Bertrand Charest want charges tossed - Action News
Home WebMail Wednesday, November 27, 2024, 08:54 AM | Calgary | -14.6°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
Montreal

Lawyers for former national ski coach Bertrand Charest want charges tossed

Bertrand Charest's lawyers say the Crown's admission that 20 of the 37 counts the one-time national ski coach was convicted of should be thrown out calls into question his convictions on all the charges, as well as the severity of his sentence.

Charest was found guilty of 37sex-related charges involving 9 women in June 2017

Bertrand Charest was sentenced to 12 years in prison for sexually abusing athletes between 1991 and 1998 when he was Canada's national ski coach. He is appealing the decision. (Radio-Canada)

Lawyers for former national ski coach Bertrand Charest argued before the Quebec's Court of Appeal Tuesday that Charest's conviction for the sexual abuse of teenage skiers who were in his charge should be tossed out.

Charest was found guilty in 2017of 37sex-related charges involving nine women who had accused him of abuse that occurred more than 20 years earlier. He was sentenced to 12 years in prison.

The women were between the ages of 12 and 19 at the time of the offences, and Charesthad been overseeing their careers.

The Crown has already conceded that 20 of the 37 counts Charest was convicted of should be thrown out, due to insufficient evidence or technical mistakes, andit has acknowledged that itcannot prove some of the victims were minorsin the case of some of the sexual exploitation charges.

It's arguing the other 17 counts for which Charest was found guilty should stand.

Both the Crown and the defence acknowledged a new trial may be possible, but both said they'd prefer to avoid that.

Louis Belleau,Charest's lawyer, argued that the Crown's admissionscall into question Charest's convictions on all the charges, as well asthe severity of the sentence.

"The abundance of errors shows that Charest did not have a trial that conformed with the rule of law," Belleau said.

Crown prosecutor Alexis Marcotte-Blangerdownplayedthe Crown's concession that some of the convictions should be thrown out for technical reasons.

"The concessions seem important in terms of numbers, but in reality they don't have a big impact on the case," Marcotte-Blanger told reporters after the hearing.

"The overall picture of what Mr. Charestis being blamed for remains unchanged," he said.

Charest was released from prison in March after serving part of his sentence, pending the outcome of this appeal.

Belleau said even if the remaining convictions are upheld, Charest has served enough time and should not return to prison.

Marcotte-Blanger said the counts that were tossed should have no effect on the sentence.

'Not Charles Manson or Jim Jones'

Belleau argued that the trial judge,Quebec court JudgeSylvainLpine, was supposed to be a "gatekeeper" for the rule of law, but hedidn't scrutinize each of the charges closely enough.

He argued Lpine treated all of the accusations against Charest in the same way, despite the fact that each case was different, in terms of the age of the victims, the severity of the abuseand the degree of consent of the complainants.

Belleau said that Charest was not "Charles Manson or Jim Jones." He said it was wrong to conclude his clientabused every skier he'd ever coached.

He said that while some of the cases included sexual activity that was clearly not consensual, he said there were other cases where there was "apparent consent,"but the trial judge failed to distinguish between such cases.

"Fifteen-year-olds or even 12-year-olds aren't entirely incapable of consent in the eyes of the law," Belleau argued.

"We're not talking about a nursery," he said, referring to Charest's ski program.

"We can't make a global portrait that each case of abuse was the same."

Belleau also questioned whether the Crown adequately proved the fact, introduced during trial, that Charest impregnated one of his victims and then later drove her to get an abortion.

"The causal link between Charest and the pregnancy was not established," Belleau said.

He argued the Crown should have asked the complainant during trial if she had had sex with anyone else during this period, rather than simply taking her word for it.Belleau called "a hole in the evidence."

Crown says Charest was controlling, 'all-powerful' coach

Marcotte-Blanger argued that in Charest'scase, context is very important.

He noted the victims were all high-levelathletes, andCharest was an "all-powerful"coach who controlled many aspects of their lives.

He also noted the big age difference between Charest and his victims and the fact that they were vulnerable and isolated young women at the time the abuses occurred.