Thread: News Article: Flower acquitted!
View Single Post
Old
08-17-2010, 12:11 PM
  #22
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number 11 View Post
he was only acquitted because the judge made a mistake.

"Lawyers for Lafleur argued that the trial judge committed an error by not taking into consideration that their client thought the court-ordered curfew for Mark Lafleur applied to the hours and not the location."
You make it look like Lafleur did something wrong, like there was a procedural mistake and he was acquited because of it. If that's what you're implying then you're dead wrong.
Quote:

Quote:
Les juges de la Cour d'appel François Doyon, François Pelletier et Marie-France Bich estiment que le juge Parent a commis une erreur de fait déterminante qui a teinté son analyse et l'a amené à conclure que M. Lafleur avait agi malhonnêtement. Cette erreur de fait consiste à avoir considéré que le jeune Lafleur devait obligatoirement coucher chez ses parents, lors de ses permissions de sorties. Or, la poursuite n'a pas fait la preuve des conditions imposées par la maison de thérapie pour ces sorties. «Comment peut-on affirmer cela (omission volontaire de parler des couchers à l'hôtel), si l'exigence de demeurer chez ses parents n'a pas été prouvée», peut-on lire dans la décision de la Cour d'appel.
The original judge's mistake was that he assumed that Lafleur's son had to sleep at Lafleur's home. The conditions for Lafleur's son release into Guy's care never included that he had to sleep at his parents' house.

Lafleur could not wrongly mislead the judge when the condition to sleep at his parents house was never even proven in the first place.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote