Engineer Simon Houle will finally go to prison: the Court of Appeal has just canceled the conditional discharge he had received after pleading guilty to sexual assault and voyeurism.
Quebec’s highest court orders the 31-year-old to surrender to prison authorities by January 30. He will have to spend 12 months behind bars and will now have a criminal record.
“The type of sexual act committed by Mr. Houle is not insignificant”, these are serious crimes, writes the Court of Appeal by restoring order in the evaluation of the sentencing factors made by Judge Matthieu Poliquin of the Court of Quebec.
Simon Houle pleaded guilty to undressing a sleeping young woman, inserting his fingers into her private parts and taking several photographs of her.
The sentence imposed last June by Judge Poliquin shocked: many people felt that a discharge was too lenient given the seriousness of the acts committed and the heavy consequences of these on the victim, in particular psychological.
Sentences written by the magistrate in his judgment had also been denounced, in particular his conclusions that the sexual assault had taken place “all in all quickly” and that a prison sentence would have “disproportionate” negative consequences for the accused, which could prevent him from traveling abroad for his work as an engineer.
The Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions (DPCP), who had initially requested a total of 15 to 18 months in prison, had appealed the judgment on the sentence.
The Court of Appeal ultimately granted his request. By its judgment delivered on Wednesday, it condemns the man to 12 months in prison for the sexual assault and two months for the head of voyeurism. But since she orders that the two sentences be served concurrently, this represents 12 months of incarceration for Simon Houle.
The DPCP declared itself “satisfied” with this outcome and hopes that the judgment of the Court of Appeal “can inspire confidence in the victims of sexual violence, and in society in general, with regard to the justice system. »
“Hidden” aggravating factors
The Court of Appeal considers that the overall approach used by Judge Poliquin to pronounce sentence on the two charges led him to “hide” certain aggravating factors linked to that of voyeurism, “in particular the number of photos, their content and the fact that they remained accessible on Mr. Houle’s phone for 44 days” — and that they were also seen by one of his friends.
“As the prosecutor pleads, the victim will never be able to be certain that his sexual integrity and his private life are no longer in danger. »
The Court of Appeal contradicted Judge Poliquin on several of his findings, which had aroused the ire of the population.
First, she reconsiders the judge’s conclusion that the attack took place “all in all quickly”. The Court of Appeal called him to order, judging that what happened that evening “wasn’t anything quick”. She points out that the accused also took photos of the victim in the kitchen, continuing to attack her where she had taken refuge. However, “the relentlessness of Mr. Houle does not appear in the list of aggravating factors considered by the judge”.
In the first instance, the engineer had admitted having touched in 2015 the genitals of a young woman who was sleeping, over her clothes. Judge Poliquin saw in this admission the fact that the accused was ready to take responsibility. The Court of Appeal considers that it was possible for the magistrate to diminish the importance of this illegal behavior because of the “transparency demonstrated” by the accused, but that he could not qualify the present aggression and voyeurism of “contextual and punctual gestures in his life”. “There is a step that it was impossible for him to cross. »
Several complaints have been made to the Quebec Judicial Council about Matthieu Poliquin, but they were all rejected.
The point on absolution
The Court of Appeal recalled certain principles of sentencing in its decision: first, absolution as a sentence is possible for the vast majority of crimes, including sexual assault.
Justice Poliquin wrote that conditional discharges have been the sentencing in cases of sexual assault. That’s true, the Court of Appeal concedes, but in all of the cases it cites, sexual assault was the only charge the offender faced — unlike Simon Houle.
Furthermore, the Court of Appeal indicates that imprisonment is the preferred sanction in cases of sexual assault, and that the range of sentences normally imposed varies from 12 to 20 months in prison.
Here, the errors made by Judge Poliquin had an impact on sentencing: they reduced the subjective seriousness of the offenses and the degree of responsibility of the offender. Without evacuating the principle of social reintegration, the sentence must denounce the illegal behavior of Simon Houle and the harm caused to the victim, affirms the highest court in Quebec by pronouncing the sentence it considers appropriate, namely prison.