Wrongly condemned for a double murder | “A confiscated existence”

How much is a “stolen life” by the judicial system? Claude Paquin, wrongly condemned for a double murder in 1983 and exempt last fall after 41 years to proclaim his innocence, claims 64 million in compensation for the state. His pursuit, deposited on Friday, details how a police skid caused the longest recognized miscarriage of justice in the history of Quebec.

Posted at 5:00 a.m.

“This affair is unprecedented, a moment of truth for the State and its institutions,” said Mr.^e Sebastian L. Pyzik and M^e Charbel Abi-Saad, lawyers of Claude Paquin.

In their pursuit of more than 100 pages deposited at the Montreal courthouse, lawyers detail the chain of events which led to “one of the worst recognized legal errors in our history”.

Claude Paquin, now 82, has two sad records, they underline. That of the longest unjustified deprivation of documented freedom in Quebec and that of the oldest innocent exempt after being wrongly condemned. He was incarcerated for 18 years, then spent 23 years in parole under severe conditions.

A life of misfortunes

The story of the applicant’s life is difficult to read as it is dotted with misfortunes. Born in 1943 from an unknown father, he spent his childhood between the orphanage and the reception centers. He claims to have suffered physical and sexual violence during this period. “He meets his mother for the first time at the age of 6, while he begs to eat in the street,” said the prosecution. Young Claude Paquin leaves school after the sixth year.

At 30, a party, he began to work for the Caïd Bernard Provençal, a bonze of organized crime in eastern Montreal. Paquin commits flights, becomes a debt collector for his boss, who calls him “my dog”. He will never be involved in murder.

In 1978, the lifeless bodies of Ronald Bourgouin, a man linked to the Provencal clan, and his spouse, Sylvie Revah, were discovered in Saint-Colomban. The crime remains unresolved for years.

Then, in 1983, when he faced serious accusations of drug trafficking, Bernard Provençal returned his jacket and became a “superb” for the Montreal police. He must help solve dozens of murders. He said in particular that his “dog” Claude Paquin “commanded” the murder of the couple found lifeless in Saint-Colomban. In reality, Provençal is a liar, and he will later recognize that it is himself who is at the origin of this crime. But before the court, his testimony is convincing.

“Would you have killed me too?” »»

Claude Paquin is found guilty of the two murders and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole before 25 years.

“Behind bars, he loses everything: his son, his freedom, his years, his identity,” write his lawyers in the pursuit. Mr. Paquin is even stabbed in the penitentiary courtyard.

During his detention, escort outings are refused to him because he refuses to recognize his crime, but he maintains his version. “I prefer to die in prison than to admit two crimes that I have never committed,” he said.

Claude Paquin’s son grew up without father. It will take seven years before they met. “When the child learns the accusations brought against his father, he asks him a question that only a child knows how to ask:” Would you have killed me too? ” -A question that alone sums up the invisible violence of an unfair condemnation, “reads the pursuit.

In 1999, after pleading his cause before a jury, Claude Paquin obtained the right to request parole earlier than expected. In 2003, after 20 years of detention, he was released to strict conditions, but he “remains subject to one of the most rigid liberation regimes provided for by law,” said his lawyers.

Witnesses encouraged to lie

The volunteers of the Innocence Quebec project are investigating the file of Claude Paquin. Under the direction of the lawyers Lida Sara Nouraie (today judge at the Court of Quebec), Nicholas St-Jacques and Julie Harinen, law students document the injustice he was the victim.

Their investigation reveals that many excess elements were hidden from the defense during the trial of Claude Paquin. The elements that tended to undermine the version of the star Bernard Provençal were camouflaged, while everything was done to make its version more credible.

According to some testimonies, the police have put pressure on witnesses and have encouraged some to lie to support Provençal.

The Superdender had become very close to a group of police officers whom he helped to “close” a host of unlocked files and which granted him all kinds of favors. Without much regard for the truth. An independent commission will ultimately confirm that the use of poorly supervised formators had led to several slippages in the 1980s in Quebec.

“Ultimately, and too late, […] The Provençal decline will eventually admit that he was parjorated to falsely incriminate the applicant in a conspiracy with SPVM police, declaring that he is himself the real official of the offense, “explains the prosecution, citing written declarations of the Caïd.

The new elements led the Minister of Justice of Canada to order a new trial. When it opened, last fall, the prosecution announced that it had no evidence to present against Claude Paquin, who was finally acquitted.

“His trajectory illustrates a Dantesque legal gear: state, serious, coarse and malicious faults, which locked him for most of his adult life in an overwhelming, irreversible and without escape laminoir. »»