Feeling remorseful after cheating on her chum with another man, Victoria* invented a false story of gang rape, the defense argued Thursday, attempting to portray the complainant as a liar. Myths and stereotypes, deplored the Crown at the trial of specialist doctor Stephan Probst and his wife.
Posted at 2:14 p.m.
“It is one of the most entrenched myths in our society, and in Canadian law […] that of the woman who has an extramarital relationship, who has remorse, and who invents a story of sexual assault from scratch. […] You have to be very careful, because in my opinion, you do not have the beginnings of proof that this is the case in this case,” argued Mr.e Delphine Mauger, Crown prosecutor.
“I ask you to reject these myths and stereotypes,” insisted Me Mauger, who teams up with Me Jérôme Laflamme.
Stephan Probst, 46, and his partner Wendy Devera, 30, are accused of group sexual assault of a young artist in 2020. A specialist in nuclear medicine, Stephan Probst is medical chief at the Jewish General Hospital and professor at the McGill University.
At the time, Victoria* wanted to have a sexual “experience” with another woman. Her chum was aware and supported him in his quest. She had met Wendy Devera on an app. When she went to Stephan Probst’s penthouse to join Wendy, the complainant was clear that she did not want a relationship with another man.
At the trial, Victoria said she had been sexually assaulted by Stephan Probst, while she had apparently been drugged with MDMA (ecstasy). Wendy Devera held the complainant during the attack, according to her version. When Victoria fled, she claims to have been attacked again by the accused. She left half naked in a taxi.
“This whole story was invented,” insisted the defense lawyer, Ms.e Valérie Riendeau.
According to the defense, Victoria got carried away into an evening of “drugs and sex with another man.” Once in the taxi, she had a panic attack, as she is “predisposed” to, according to the defense, and she invented a story for her chum.
“Why lie so much? Why hide so many things except that she had several things to reproach herself for? […] She had broken the agreement with her partner. She had made a promise to herself to respect her values and principles,” argued M.e Riendeau.
Judge Suzanne Costom then asked him why a woman supposedly overcome with remorse would call her husband in tears. chum to make up a story on the spot?
“We are facing someone who has anxiety,” insisted Me Riendeau.
According to the defense, once the complaint was initiated, the complainant had “no other choice but to construct a story to spread the false accusations”.
For the Crown, this is a “founding myth” in Canadian law.
Implied consent?
In all cases, according to the Crown, Stephan Probst’s own testimony at the trial demonstrates that he took no measures to ensure the complainant’s consent to vaginal penetration without a condom. On the stand, Stephan Probst referred to the complainant’s “moans” and the look on her face when she saw his erect penis as proof of “implied” consent.
However, neither implicit consent nor ambiguous consent exists in Canadian law, recalls M.e Mauger. “Only a yes can say yes,” she insisted. In addition, the complainant had expressed a “very clear refusal” a little earlier in the spa, when Stephan Probst had tried to kiss her.
At trial, Victoria described feeling dizzy and having difficulty moving during the evening. She even struggled to get dressed at one point. However, for the defense, the complainant clearly exaggerated her symptoms. The proof: she then had enough balance to perform cunnilingus on the co-accused.
“I’m going to be raw: perform cunnilingus doggy-stylewe need a certain balance,” pleaded Me Riendeau. Moreover, the complainant supposedly had enough strength to run towards the exit, the lawyer pointed out.
According to the other defense lawyer Me Ana-Maria Mocanu, Stephan Probst was “very credible” and was not contradicted on any facts.
Wendy Devera did not testify.
Closing arguments continue Thursday afternoon.
