Crown argues Accurso should get prison time
Construction magnate’s lawyer says corrupt system was already in place
Antonio Accurso will find out next week whether he will have to serve time behind bars for having participated in Laval’s corrupt system of awarding construction contracts to colluding companies before they were even put to tender.
During sentencing arguments at the Laval courthouse on Thursday, prosecutor Richard Rougeau asked that Accurso, 66, receive a five-year prison term for the crimes for which a jury convicted him on Monday. He was found guilty of being part of a conspiracy along with former Laval mayor Gilles Vaillancour, “to commit acts of corruption in municipal affairs” and breach of trust between 1996 and 2010; conspiracy to commit fraud; defrauding the city of Laval; bribing city officials; and that he helped Vaillancourt and two city officials who worked under the former mayor to commit breach of trust.
Vaillancourt, the man who created and managed the system of collusion, received a six-year prison term for his role in the conspiracy. On Thursday, Accurso’s lawyer, Marc Labelle, argued before Superior Court Justice James Brunton that, based on the evidence heard during Accurso’s trial, his client’s case does not compare at all with Vaillancourt’s.
“He did not create the system. The system was imposed on him,” Labelle said while arguing that Accurso should be sentenced to a prison term between 18 and 24 months that can be served in the community.
The defence lawyer characterized what Accurso did as “a business decision” made in order to ensure his companies continued receiving construction contracts from the city of Laval, between 1996 and 2010.
“While it was a business decision, a jury determined that it was criminal,” Labelle said, noting that the evidence heard at trial also suggested Accurso and Vaillancourt did not get along. “It’s not like they sat down together and decided things.”
The three key players in running the system — Vaillancourt; the city’s director-general, Claude Asselin; and the city’s head of engineering, Claude de Guise — all received sentences, to be served behind bars, of between two years less one day and the six-year term Vaillancourt received in 2016.
Thirty-seven people in all were charged in Project Honorer when arrests were made in 2013. Twenty-seven men pleaded guilty, and only seven received sentences that involved serving time behind bars. Four of the seven were executives or the owners of construction companies or engineering firms and none of their sentences come close to what Rougeau requested for Accurso on Thursday.
The prosecutor asked that Accurso be sentenced to five-year prison terms for two of the charges of which he was convicted and three-year terms for the three others. Rougeau asked that the sentences be served concurrently and that Accurso be ordered to reimburse the city of Laval $1.6 million.
By comparison, Accurso’s cousin, Giuseppe Molluso, the president of Louisbourg Construction, was sentenced to a prison term of two years less one day that Molluso is currently serving in the community. Labelle noted that, based on what was heard during Accurso’s trial, Molluso would have been more involved in the regular activities of the system of collusion than his client. The attorney argued that because of this, Accurso’s sentence should be less than Molluso’s. The president of Accurso’s company also agreed to reimburse the city of Laval more than $1.7 million when he entered his guilty plea last year.
Louisbourg Construction and Simard Beaudry Inc., another company owned by Accurso, were awarded more than $95-million worth of construction contracts from the city of Laval while he was part of the city’s system of collusion. Based on an estimate made by Rougeau, Accurso paid back more than $1.5 million in kickbacks to Laval city officials like Vaillancourt.
At one point in Thursday ’s hearing, Brunton asked Rougeau to explain the significant difference between the sentence he is seeking for Accurso and the 18-month prison term that construction boss Ronnie (René) Mergl received last year when he pleaded guilty to collusion. Brunton noted that, during Accurso’s trial, evidence suggested Mergl was often involved in making sure the system of collusion ran smoothly.
Rougeau replied that Accurso’s two companies — Simard Beaudry Inc. and Louisbourg Construction — “represented 25 per cent of the fraud committed” while the system of collusion was in place.
He estimated that Laval taxpayers lost more than $1.6 million from having to pay more for the contracts awarded to Accurso’s companies because the bidding system was rigged. The prosecutor also said Accurso should not benefit from the assumption of rehabilitation the other men received when they pleaded guilty.
Accurso was the only person charged in Project Honorer who had a trial. Six of the accused saw a stay of proceedings placed on the charges they faced, and three men died of natural causes while their cases were still pending.
Brunton is scheduled to deliver his decision on the sentence on Thursday.
He did not create the system. The system was imposed on him. MARC LABELLE, defence lawyer for Antonio Accurso