Fraudulent electoral maneuver: the mayor of Saguenay found guilty

The mayor of Saguenay was found guilty of one of the three counts weighed against her for fraudulent electoral maneuvers.

Julie Dufour was deemed at fault in the file of the former liberal deputy Serge Simard. However, she was acquitted with regard to the current advisor Jean-Marc Crevier and the ex-candidate at the town hall Jacinthe Vaillancourt.

We are disappointed, we are surprised. We expected another result. However, out of two of the three counts, my client is acquitted, which is good news.

The elected official has the minimum sentence provided for in the law, a fine of $ 5,000 plus costs.

Ms. Dufour has already indicated that she was going to bring the cause on appeal. The Superior Court will control the legality of judge Duguay’s decisionmentioned the accused’s lawyer, Me Charles Levasseur, at the exit of the courtyard.

The mayor is firmly intended to remain in office and to be again candidate for the municipal elections in November, which is allowed as long as the call process has not been completed.

Justice Louis Duguay returned his verdict in the morning at the Chicoutimi courthouse. He had summoned both parties at 9:30 a.m.. Reading his decision took almost an hour.

Reminder of events

In October 2024, the Director General of the Elections of Quebec (DGEQ) had sent three reports of an offense to the mayor for having violated the law on elections and referendums in the municipalities.

He reproached her for trying to dissuade three political opponents of presenting herself at the town hall against her during the 2021 elections by offering them profits or a position in the municipal apparatus.

These three people are the current adviser Jean-Marc Crevier, the former liberal deputy Serge Simard and the ex-candidate at the town hall Jacinthe Vaillancourt. The three of them testified during the trial.

Part of the defense deemed not credible

The judge said at the outset that the explanations provided by the defense were not credible regarding the meeting between Serge Simard and Julie Dufour. It is not credible to take an interest in someone whose campaign is beating the wingreferring to the one who was at that time a political opponent of the defendant. The judge also took into account the testimony of municipal councilor Michel Potvin.

It appears from the evidence, as a whole, that the defendant knows how to defend herself.

During the trial, the mayor chose to present her version of the facts in affidavits, legal documents written under oath. She did not testify in person before the court.

In his decision, the judge returns to these written declarations by mentioning: We cannot ignore certain words of the defendant drawn from his sworn declaration.

We can understand that a public figure can give in verbal swelling, but much less in the context of a declaration made under oath. This also discredits it.

On the other hand, unless the date error, the magistrate indicates that the testimony of Serge Simard does not suffer from any discrepancy.

The court declares that he does not believe the version of the defendant, any more than he considers the defense offered in the proceedingscan we read.

Explanations concerning Jean-Marc Crevier and Jacinthe Vaillancourt

As for the second accusation, the judge mentions that the conflict cannot be disregarded between Mr. Crevier and Mrs. Dufour.

He underlines a contradiction as to a date raised in the depositions of Jean-Marc Crevier and Josée Néron. Judge Duguay indicates that several elements supported by Mr. Crevier have not been supported by testimonies.

It is likely that the events surrounding the meeting between Mr. Crevier and the defendant took place in the manner mentioned by the latter, but the court cannot be convinced of any reasonable doubtindicates the judge.

After reading the verdict, Jean-Marc Crevier admitted to a sigh of relief, even if the magistrate judged that his claims could not be proven. I told the truthhe mentioned in an interview.

As for the latest accusation which concerns the candidate Jacinthe Vaillancourt, the judge stresses that the latter raised an element that during the trial, even if she met the investigator Pierre Dufour twice.

In this case too, elements set out by Ms. Vaillancourt have not been endorsed by witnesses. The degradation of the relationship between the two women was also mentioned in reading the verdict. In his testimony, sometimes emerges an impression of bitternessnotes the judge.

More details to come