No defense at the trial of the doll-child
Former lawyer Antoine Gagnon, accused of importing a doll-erotic the size of a child, will present no defense. The parties will plead on Wednesday.
The lawyer Gagnon, Mr. Gervais Labrecque, announced that he would make no defense and would not testify because his client in the eyes of the defense, the Crown has not discharged its burden of proving the offenses beyond of any reasonable doubt.
Antoine Gagnon, 31, is charged with importing and possessing child pornography. The defense will argue that the doll is not an object of child pornography.
Crown Attorney Valérie Lahaie has declared her case closed. She presented to Judge Jean Asselin the famous doll silicone, 103 cm high, with three orifices (mouth, vulva and anus) and translucent clothing.
The doll, seized at Gagnon after a controlled delivery, was never unpacked by the accused.
Subsequently, the Crown had a border services officer testify, who seized the doll at the Mirabel Airport in May 2017, and the two SPVQ investigators who retrieved the data and returned the information. analysis of the content of the computer seized by Antoine Gagnon.
Computer proof widely accepted
Judge Jean Asselin of the Court of Quebec accepted in large part the computer evidence presented by the Crown. Between February and May 2017, Antoine Gagnon has access to 3600 sites related to erotic dolls. He did research using words like “no chest sexdoll”. The accused was given access to sites showing light-hearted children and teenagers, forums and sites showing pornographic videos of men who have sex with miniature dolls.
The police did not find the website consulted by Gagnon to buy the doll. However, they have in evidence the bill of purchase, provided by Gagnon to the border authorities, and consultations on the UPS website to track the parcel shipped from China.
The defense wanted all internet consultations after the doll’s date of purchase (April 17, 2017) to be dismissed because, in its view, irrelevant.
On the contrary, the court considers that “anything done by the accused after the date of purchase on April 17 is likely to inform him about what happened before June 8, 2017 (date of the search),” the judge.
However, Asselin JA excludes from the evidence the screenshots made by SPVQ’s principal investigator, Olivier Simard, which were intended to illustrate, with the help of a web archive platform, Antoine Gagnon’s consultations. . The “Wayback Machine” public archive platform, however, did not allow for an exact picture of what the accused was able to look at two years earlier, which led to the inadmissibility of the evidence, which was too prejudicial to the ‘accused.
“Without an image of the site consulted by the accused at a specific point in time, the court can not agree with the idea that it is a faithful and accurate representation of the sites consulted by the accused,” Justice Asselin concluded.