Motions filed in Contrecoeur case
Two men were among those arrested in connection with 2012 sale of city land
Two of the people accused of conspiracy and fraud in connection with the sale of municipal land in Montreal to a developer at a discounted price are to find out on Friday whether a judge will grant their requests to drop all charges against them.
Pasquale Fedele and Pascal Patrice presented separate motions in court on Wednesday seeking to have the charges against them dismissed by Quebec Court Judge Yvan Poulin, who is presiding over the trial.
Poulin heard arguments on the motions on Wednesday and said he’ll issue his ruling in court on Friday.
Fedele and Patrice, who were senior managers at Construction Frank Catania et Associés Inc., the company that was awarded the deal to buy and develop housing on the Faubourg Contrecoeur land in 2007, were among those arrested in 2012 in connection with the sale.
Among the other accused are Frank Zampino, a former politician at Montreal city hall, and entrepreneur Paolo Catania, who was president of Construction Frank Catania et Associés.
Patrice and Fedele, who each face a charge of conspiracy and two charges of fraud, argued before Poulin on Wednesday that the Crown did not present evidence at trial that would garner a guilty verdict for fraud or conspiracy.
The Crown rested its case against Fedele, Patrice, Zampino, Catania and two other former executives of Construction Frank Catania et Associés, Martin D’Aoust and André Fortin, in early July.
When the trial resumes on Tuesday, it will be the defence’s turn to present its case and call witnesses. Remaining trial dates are set for early September and for most of October, when the two sides are expected to present their final arguments.
Patrice, who is represented by a lawyer, and Fedele, who is representing himself, argue in their motions that the Crown presented no evidence that either of them committed fraud, had knowledge that any fraud was being committed or facilitated, encouraged or helped anyone commit fraud.
They also argue a “total absence of evidence” that an agreement existed between either man and his alleged co-conspirators.
Patrice’s lawyer Isabelle Lamarche argued in court on Wednesday that witnesses who testified for the Crown this spring said they couldn’t recall what role Patrice, who was director of environment for the Catania firm and a company shareholder, had in the Contrecoeur project.
Even circumstantial evidence requires establishing that the accused had knowledge that fraud was being committed, Lamarche told the judge.
The Crown’s case doesn’t have the elements to prove “a meeting of the minds,” she added, referring to the conspiracy charge against her client.
Lamarche also noted that none of the witnesses testified that a plan was hatched to defraud the city’s real estate arm, the Société d’habitation et de développement de Montréal (SHDM), which sold the Contrecoeur land.
For his part, Fedele, who was senior vice-president of the Catania firm and responsible for the company’s bids, argued that the Crown presented no evidence that he communicated with others in the alleged conspiracy. He also said the Crown presented no evidence that he participated in the preparation of the Catania firm’s bid for the land or that he was aware that a call for bids would be launched.
Fedele also noted that he no longer worked for the Catania firm when it submitted its bid for the Contrecoeur land in December 2006.
The Crown, however, argued that witnesses testified that Fedele and Patrice were present at different meetings with consultants who worked for the SHDM to prepare the business plan for the Contrecoeur project and to prepare a call for bids that was “not honest, not neutral, not transparent.”
Among the evidence presented at trial, prosecutor Nicole Martineau pointed to a phone log showing that Fedele had three phone calls with Bernard Trépanier, who was the chief fundraiser for Union Montreal, the party that was in power at city hall, on the day the call for bids was launched in October 2006.
Trépanier is being tried separately in the Contrecoeur case.
In the case of Patrice, Martineau said the evidence showed he was among the recipients of emails discussing the type and cost of housing that was planned for the Contrecoeur site. Martineau also referred to a witness who testified they didn’t recall what Patrice looked like, but knew he was responsible for the project for the Catania firm.
The Catania firm “had such confidence it will win,” Martineau said, that it started work before it even won the call for bids. She referred to emails showing that two days before it submitted its bid to buy the Contrecoeur land in December 2006, the firm was discussing additional work to be done to decontaminate the site.