Maître L’Écuyer was the first to plead since his client testified during the trial.

He began his argument by reminding the jury members that they did not have to choose between the version of the facts offered by Mario Lafontaine and the one offered by Steve Lévesque. Maître L’Écuyer pointed out that it was instead up to the Crown to prove without reasonable doubt that his client had committed second -degree murder. He also told the jury that he should not judge Steve Lévesque based on his lifestyle.

Prior to the trial, Mario Lafontaine said he saw the defendant shoot Maxime Dugas-Lepage with a gun at his home in Sainte-Anne-des-Monts on the night of January 20, 2020.

For his part, Steve Lévesque explained that he would prefer that the victim draw the gun and who it pointed at him. The accused said that he would have tried to disarm Maxime Dugas-Lepage and while the two men were struggling, he would have fired a shot that would have killed the victim.

His lawyer told the jury that though his client cause of death, he must be acquitted.

In his argument, Pierre L’Écuyer described Mario Lafontaine for a long time as a liar and fraudster, pointing out the shortcomings and contradictions in his testimony and statements made to the police.

I submit to you that he did not even see what happened. He was drunk and frozen like a bulletsaid Steve Lévesque’s lawyer about Mario Lafontaine.

Maître L’Écuyer also reminded the jury that Mr. Lafontaine himself told the court that he had deceived one of his former employers.

Steve Lévesque’s lawyer also pointed out that Mr. Lafontaine took a long time to answer some questions, when he was cross-examined in court, and this meant that this witness would lie.

Pierre L’Écuyer also underlined the fact that Mario Lafontaine did not face any charges related to this case, although the latter himself admitted to participating in the cleaning of the scene.

Investigator Steve Girard, who was called to the witness stand during the Defense’s presentation of evidence, told the court that Mr. Lafontaine cannot be charged, because, according to the Criminal Code, his own testimony cannot be used to blame him.

Steve Lévesque’s lawyer reminded the jury that Mr. Lafontaine was seen in surveillance videos, as he was refueling Steve Lévesque’s vehicle at the time the victim’s body was found in the trunk. Mario Lafontaine allegedly drove the defendant’s vehicle from Rimouski to Sainte-Anne-des-Monts on the night of January 20 to 21, 2020.

Another witness also explained in court that he would have renewed Mario Lafontaine, Carl Lévesque and Maxime Labrie from Rimouski to Sainte-Anne-des-Monts the next day after the alleged facts.

Pierre L’Écuyer also underlined the fact that, according to him, the conclusions of the expert on stains and projections, Karine Gibson, who testified at the end of the Crown’s presentation of evidence, were more in agreement with the version of his clients.

The specialist said the blood droplets indicated that they came from a source located at low altitude. In particular, they would have been thrown in the direction of the refrigerator and in the black trash can.

Family members of the victim attended all the proceedings taking place at the Rimouski courthouse for several weeks. Wednesday morning, they calmly listened to the defendant’s attorney’s argument.

Steve Lévesque listened carefully to his lawyer, maintaining a neutral air and looking at the jury.

The trial will resume Wednesday afternoon with arguments by criminal and penal prosecution lawyer Jérôme Simard.