Sûreté du Québec police officer André Charland was acquitted of sexually assaulting two 15-year-old girls in Lac-Mégantic in the 1980s. However, the applicants provided disturbing reports of their sexual assaults at the hands of the future Eastern Townships police officer.
Posted at 8:00 am
Louis Samuel Perron The Press
Six months after the trial, Judge Paul Dunnigan returned a verdict based on his notes on June 17 at the Sherbrooke Courthouse without filing a ruling. In order to obtain a copy, the prosecutor was forced to request it from the judge and undertake not to publish it. It is therefore thanks to the audio recording of the hearing that we can understand this public interest decision.
André Charland, a 55-year-old Candiac resident, was charged in November 2018 with alleged sex crimes committed against two 15-year-old girls in 1986 and 1987. At the time, André Charland was about 20 years old and not a police officer. However, he was a prominent young hockey player in the Lac-Mégantic area.
Different accounts
The first victim is said to have met André Charland in a bar on a Saturday evening. At that time, 15-year-olds were often in bars in Lac-Mégantic, according to the complainants. At the end of the day, André Charland invited the teenager and a few friends to her parents.
Their accounts diverge in the sequel. The applicant stated that when she left she felt “dizzy” and could not remember anything about the night. When she wakes up, she reports that André Charland was about to penetrate her. During her police interrogation, she testified that she was bleeding from the vagina and anus and saw a heavy streak of blood on the sheets.
André Charland gave a completely different version at the trial. The applicant had fallen asleep on the sofa in the evening, and then in the morning he had noticed that she had come into bed with him that night. After they kissed, he asked her if she wanted to go further. “Yes, but quietly,” she replied. He entered her briefly, but stopped when she demanded to stop in pain.
“The defendant’s informed consent version of [la plaignante] of the sexual relationship cannot be ruled out, even if his statements do not appear more likely than those of [la plaignante] concluded Judge Dunnigan. Note that the age of consent at that time was 14.
Shortly after that incident, the first applicant claimed to have confided in her friend (the second applicant) that she had been attacked by André Charland.
Her friend would then have confided in turn that she had been attacked by the older ice hockey player. A fuzziness remains in this discussion.
“Erased” Memories
In her statements to the police, the second complainant initially expressed doubts about the quality of her memories. “It was something I really erased, I didn’t want to know anything about it,” she said. But in court, his account seemed very specific.
At that time, after an ice hockey game, the complainant went to a party at the accused’s house. According to her performance, she entered the bathroom, but André Charland followed her and closed the door. The young man then played with her breasts and tried to kiss them. When she wanted to go out, he replied, “Well no, you can’t get out like that,” she testified.
The teenager then went down to the basement to get her coat. “You didn’t think you could get away with it. We are coming to an end,” André Charland would have started by blocking the door. According to the applicant, the young man kissed her, touched her breasts and then forced her to perform oral sex.
“Even though she claims to have white people, she recalls finding herself with her back to him, her clothes down. There is penetration and pain in the vagina. She testifies after having a moment where she was more or less there. She gave up,” the judge summed up. André Charland then threatened to tarnish her reputation if she denounced him.
According to André Charland, none of this happened as he claims to have never seen or known this woman. He also claims that back then he never invited a hockey group to his parents’ apartment. A man whom the applicant saw at the party testified that he had never been there.
“Even if the defendant’s version does not seem more likely than the applicant’s, the court cannot rule it out,” the judge concluded. However, the judge’s reasons for concluding an acquittal remain difficult to define. Surprisingly, the judge did not rule on the credibility of the statements made by the applicants and the defendant.
Crown prosecutor Me Isabelle Dorion is considering the possibility of appealing the verdict. The police officer was defended by Me Nadine Touma.