MONTREAL — The Crown is attempting to undermine the credibility of Éric Salvail, asking the judge Alexandre Dalmau to accept counter-evidence to demonstrate that the accused, in his testimony, wanted to give “a wrong impression and false” of his person to the magistrate.
The prosecutor Amélie Rivard presented three testimonies of people who said to have suffered either touching, inappropriate, or exhibitionism on the part of Eric Salvail and remarks of a sexual nature so constant and repetitive. These are acts such as alleged, and an alleged sexual assault in a washroom of Radio-Canada in 1993, that led Donald Duguay to lodge a complaint against the producer and host fallen.
Éric Salvail, who is present in Court, is accused of sexual assault, forcible confinement and sexual harassment, actions that would have been posed in 1993.
The approach of the Crown does not, however, aim to establish the evidence of similar facts, which would be to demonstrate that it is a behavior constant of the defendant, what rules of law do not allow him at this stage of the trial. The purpose of Me Rivard is rather counter to the words of Éric Salvail, who has insisted several times in his testimony on the fact that it was not so, that he was not that kind of person and people who know the know.
To Me, Rivard explained that it is the credibility of that statement that it intends to undermine : “If this evidence is allowed, it will only be used to attack the credibility of the accused and to re-establish an image that this could imply to the court without inviting the tribunal to conclude that it is the kind of person to commit this type of offence”, she said.
None of the three witnesses who have come forward cannot be identified due to a court order, and none of the three does not intend to lodge a complaint either.
In defence, Michel Massicotte has vigorously disputed the fact that Éric Salvail has put his reputation on the line when his main testimony, although certain passages suggest the opposite. I Massicotte has sought to demonstrate that it is the Crown, in cross-examination, who wanted to insist on this issue : “The attorney for the applicant was forced from the outset to put his reputation on the line by asking him if he had already crossed the line.”
“It is the appellant who, by his questions, has created a little bit of this characteristic of the respondent that she now wants to attack with this counter-proof,” said the experienced lawyer.
During his testimony, Éric Salvail has denied the bulk of the allegations of Donald Duguay, calling them wacky.
Donald Duguay has himself asked to be publicly identified.