National Post (National Edition)
WITNESS CREDIBILITY KEY TO EX-MAYOR APPLEBAUM’S TRIAL.
Applebaum defence points to credibility
MONTREAL • During his two-week criminal trial, former Montreal mayor Michael Applebaum has been painted as a master of corruption who used his office to extort cash from developers. He steered a young aide into a life of crime and left a disillusioned real-estate developer a nervous wreck, Quebec court Judge Louise Provost heard.
But as the trial concludes, it has become clear the prosecution has a problem. There was no paper trail — no money seized from Applebaum, no fishy transactions showing up in his bank records. In fact, the case against Applebaum hangs on the testimony of Hugo Tremblay, the young aide who was knee-deep in corruption himself but escaped charges by testifying against his exboss.
“The question is why would we believe Mr. Tremblay?” defence lawyer Pierre Teasdale said during closing arguments Monday. “He’s a bluffer. He’s a manipulator. He’s a man who has always been in debt since he began working. He’s an opportunist. He’s a man who sees a personal interest in denouncing his boss.”
The trial has heard that Tremblay shook down businessmen for bribes related to two projects while he was the right-hand man to Applebaum, who at the time was mayor of the borough of Côte-des-Neiges—NotreDame-de-Grâce.
Tremblay testified that it was Applebaum who introduced him to corruption. In 2007, he said, Applebaum instructed him to demand an extra “political” effort from real-estate developers Anthony Keeler and Robert Stein to ensure their housing project received borough approval. Tremblay said he collected $30,000 cash from Keeler and gave $20,000 of it to Applebaum.
For a second scheme involving a 2010 contract to operate a new aquatic centre, Tremblay said it was his idea to seek cash from the winning bidders. He said Applebaum approved the plan and they split 50-50 the $25,000 paid by Pierre Laporte of the firm Sogep.
Teasdale noted that Tremblay was the only witness to testify that he gave money to Applebaum. And he said his credibility, along with that of three men who agreed to pay the bribes, is undermined by the fact they had committed crimes and were seeking to avoid punishment.
When investigators came knocking in 2013, it was clear their sights were set on Applebaum, who had recently been sworn in as interim mayor of Montreal. “Each of the four witnesses knew the police investigation targeted Applebaum,” Teasdale said. “They all knew that if they collaborated, the statements they gave would not be used against them.” Each of them, he said, “had an interest in saving his own hide.”
Teasdale said it was unusual that none of the four — Tremblay, Keeler, Stein and Laporte — was required to sign an agreement with the Crown as co-operating witnesses. Such deals typically involve admission of guilt to a charge and a polygraph test in exchange for a reduced or suspended sentence.
In her closing arguments Friday, Crown prosecutor Nathalie Kleber acknowledged that witness credibility was key to her case. She said the level of detail in the witnesses’ accounts and the absence of significant contradictions attested to their credibility.
Much of the conversation about the bribe scheme, whether as recounted by Tremblay or captured on recordings after he turned informant, is vague. “When they are talking about corruption, it is never frank, clear or direct words that they use,” Kleber said. She pointed to one phrase she considered damning, spoken by Applebaum after Tremblay, who was wearing a wire, told him the police were aware bribes had been paid for the projects. Applebaum said, “In order to charge you, they’ve got to see the money.”
Applebaum was arrested at his home in June, 2013, without the police ever having seen the money. Teasdale said the reason investigators sent Tremblay on three unsuccessful missions to have Applebaum incriminate himself was that they were worried Tremblay’s word alone was not enough.
Applebaum never took the stand, and the defence called no witnesses. In the end, Teasdale said, the case will come down to whether the judge believes Tremblay was collecting the bribes on Applebaum’s behalf.
“To convict Mr. Applebaum, you have to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Tremblay is telling the truth,” he said. Closing arguments are set to conclude Wednesday, and then Applebaum’s fate will be in Judge Provost’s hands.