A judge presiding over the defamation lawsuit brought by Quebec Cardinal Marc Ouellet signaled skepticism toward the plaintiff’s claims on Tuesday morning, making several remarks suggesting he does not find the accuser, Paméla Groleau, credible. The case centers on allegations of sexual misconduct made against Ouellet.
During closing arguments, Judge Martin Castonguay repeatedly questioned the narrative presented by Groleau, who alleges Ouellet engaged in unwanted physical contact on three occasions between 2008 and 2010 although she was a lay pastoral agent for the Catholic Church. Ouellet is seeking $100,000 in damages after Groleau named him in a 2022 class-action lawsuit alleging sexual misconduct by members of the Quebec City diocese.
The judge challenged Groleau’s account of a “gradation” of increasingly inappropriate gestures from Ouellet, referencing her testimony about an incident where he allegedly slid his hand down her back to her buttocks. Castonguay asserted that Groleau’s story had changed since the original class-action lawsuit. Ne dites pas que ça n’a jamais changé. Ça a changé.
(“Don’t say it never changed. It changed,”) he stated.
Castonguay specifically questioned an instance where Ouellet allegedly held Groleau’s hands for an extended period and whispered her name in her ear. Si quelqu’un voit un problème là-dedans, moi, je n’en vois pas
(“If someone sees a problem with that, I don’t,”) the judge said. The case highlights the challenges of litigating allegations of past misconduct where memories and interpretations may differ.
Je ne pense pas qu’elle n’a pas vécu ça. Mais elle l’a peut-être amplifié, par exemple.
(“I don’t think she didn’t experience that. But she may have amplified it, for example,”) the judge remarked.
The defense is also relying on testimony from other women, including Marie-Louise Moreau, who testified last week. Moreau recounted an incident from 1992 where she alleged Ouellet, then rector of the Grand Seminary of Montreal, rubbed against her while she prepared for a mass. She identified him by his Easter chasuble, according to reports.
Paméla Groleau is being sued for defamation by Cardinal Marc Ouellet.
Photo : Radio-Canada / Mathieu Catafard
Yet, the judge raised concerns about the date of the alleged incident involving Moreau, stating it was impossible
(“impossible”) that it occurred as described. Ce n’est pas rien que la date. Ça ne se peut pas que ce soit le cardinal
(“The date is not insignificant. It couldn’t have been the cardinal,”) he added, suggesting another priest may have been wearing the chasuble.
Ouellet initiated the $100,000 defamation suit after his name appeared in a class-action demand against priests from the Quebec City diocese accused of sexual assault.
Un propos de mononcle
A tense exchange occurred when the defense attorney mentioned allegedly sexually suggestive remarks made by Ouellet to Groleau.
C’est la deuxième fois qu’on se voit cette semaine, mais je peux vous embrasser encore, il n’y a pas de mal à se gâter un peu
(“It’s the second time I’ve seen you this week, but I can still kiss you, there’s no harm in spoiling yourself a little,”) Ouellet allegedly said to the pastoral agent.
The judge interrupted the attorney, stating Il a peut-être eu un propos de mononcle, ça, c’est possible, mais de le faire passer à un propos de nature sexuelle, j’ai un problème avec ça.
(“He may have made an uncle-like remark, that’s possible, but to present it as a sexually suggestive remark, I have a problem with that.”)
Ce sera à vous de trancher
(“It will be up to you to decide,”) the attorney responded. Ça va me faire plaisir
(“That will give me pleasure,”) Judge Castonguay retorted.
This represents not the first time during the trial that Judge Castonguay has shown signs of frustration. He has repeatedly admonished another of Groleau’s attorneys during witness questioning. He also indicated last week that he found the defendant’s credibility questionable, saying Madame invente
(“Madam is inventing”).
With closing arguments complete, Judge Castonguay has taken the case under deliberation. Ouellet has previously stated that if the court rules in his favor, he will donate the funds to organizations working to prevent sexual assault in Indigenous communities.
