New trial for the man Gatineau suspected of killing the woman

Judges of the nation’s highest court handed down this decision unanimously, in a judgment made public on Friday.

According to them, the police have an obligation to give the accused an additional opportunity to consult an attorney before he or she is questioned after the initial telephone conversation provided extraordinary circumstances.

Patrick Dussault spoke with his lawyer on the phone from the police station, but the lawyer offered to visit his client because he had the impression that the man did not understand everything during the discussion.

At first the police accepted and arranged the meeting, but they changed their minds when the lawyer arrived on the scene. The discussion did not take place in person and a police officer told Patrick Dussault that his lawyer had not come to the station.

An interrogation took place and the man gave an incriminating statement to the police.

This element was accepted as evidence by a Superior Court judge, despite the challenges of the accused. A Gatineau resident was convicted, in 2016, of second -degree murder of a woman, Diane Lahaie.

The Court of Appeal, however, agreed with Mr. Dussault in rejecting the incriminating statement, overturning the judgment and requesting a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada on Friday upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal and ruled that the right to advice, protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was not respected.

There are objectively visible indications that show that police conduct has the effect of destroying the legal advice given to defendants by the attorney in their telephone conversation. Therefore, even if the phone call constitutes a complete consultation, however, the police have an obligation to give the accused a second chance to consult with the lawyer.will we read about the decision published on Friday.

The highest court in the land heard the case in December and all nine judges were present.