A young Crown prosecutor accused of driving and striking impaired and stopped running in his attempt to obtain a stay of proceedings, this Wednesday at the Montreal Municipal Court.
Me Alice Bourbonnais-Rougeau, who is in the role of serious crime director of crimes and penal prosecutions (DPCP), was arrested in April 2021, after giving the police more than five difficult hours. In particular, he had denied them access to his residence.
The 30-year-old attorney was involved in an accident while driving and left the scene when a witness called 911, according to a judge, and was released on Wednesday in a motion to delay the proceedings.
Judge Gabriel Boutros, while refusing, did not stop to highlight several of my Bourbonnais-Rougeau’s behavior, which are unscrupulous, considering his status as a prosecutor.
“It’s a key state [ comme avocate ] which she is trying to use to place herself outside of the two prosecutors”, reads the judgment of Judge Boutros, who accuses her of using the prosecutor with her intention to restrain the magistrates who were trying to slip.
Facing her, he tried to convince her that she could not leave her house any longer, because of the deployment of her police, who were guarding her apartment, the judge Boutros was sharp;
“It’s ironic [qu’elle] He complains that he is under the seat. [policier] in his chamber when the officers of the peace were forced to stab him [pendant] at five o’clock in the middle of the night (…)” while waiting for the bet.
The court not only recognizes the wrongs of the lawyer, and agrees with her on certain points.
In this sense, Judge Boutros criticizes the police officers who suddenly put an end to the telephone conversation between Bourbonnais-Rougeau and his lawyer from the police station, which the court considers violated the exercise of legal counsel.
However, an error by the police led him to disprove the validity of the blood alcohol test he underwent, resulting in his rejection.
At the time, the tests indicate 135 and 145 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, while the permitted limit is set at 80 mg.
But the judge, not dismissing the charge, loses. In this specific case, the test is not based on the blood alcohol level, but rather on the state of intoxication that the witness could observe, which remains to be proven.
The trial will continue later in April.
