At the stage of petitions in the former editorial inquiry Destiny Mitchell Wenne, defense sought to undermine the plaintiff’s credibility.
The defense is not qualified to explain the evidence and actions of the plaintiff who alleged that Michelle Wenne was sexually assaulted in Quebec in 2008. For three hours, Friday morning, Wenney’s attorney systematically raised “inconsistencies” and “improbability” in the alleged victim’s testimony.
In 2008, at the age of 17, a 60-year-old man sexually assaulted a young woman who worked as an intern at the Institute du Nouveau Monde he led.
His lawyer analyzed the case events in detail; There were two episodes alleging the attacks, but there was also a letter signed by the former minister and the complainant, along with a recorded interview with Lis Payet.
First, mE Lida-Sarah Nourai said the episode where the accused, who was also his wife, put his hand on the complainant’s thigh just did not happen. “Nothing happened in the taxi,” pleads the lawyer.
As Michelle Wenne assaulted the complainant in front of his residence in Quebec, after they walked together, Mr.E Nouri stated that “the episode leaves room for doubt.”
She believes the complainant made “suspicious surveillance” when Mr Wenne placed his arm around his waist. The accused said he put his hand on the young woman’s shoulders.
OmTo me Payet
The attorney also returned to the audio recording, where the plaintiff and Liz Payet, the plaintiff modified the recording to “dramatize the meeting”. The cuts in the audiotape are said to have been made by the complainant “to demonstrate facts supporting her version of the contents”.
The plaintiff is “quick to exaggerate” and, according to counsel, her testimony “causes serious problems of credibility and credibility”. Therefore the judge should not accept the evidence of the complainant, Mrs. believes.E Nourai.
OmE Crown Prosecutor Michael Burube will appeal his part in the afternoon.