The Crown had made well, says the justice François Huot of the superior Court, not to bring terrorism charges against Alexander Bissonnette as the “slaughter unnamable” of 29 January 2017 was not, according to him.
In her very lengthy decision on the sentence of the killer of the Great Mosque of Quebec, the judge Huot has reserved a few paragraphs to the offence of terrorism, which could constitute an aggravating circumstance and play in the imposition of the penalty.
Despite repeated requests from the leaders of the muslim community across the country, the public ministry has never filed against Alexander Bissonnette charge under section 83.01 of the criminal Code, because he believed that the evidence did not supporting.
Section 83.01) defines terrorism as “an act committed both in the name of a goal, an objective or a cause of political, religious or ideological, to intimidate all or part of the population with respect to its security or compelling a person, a government, or a national or international organization to perform an act or abstain from doing any act”.
The submissions on sentencing, the Crown prosecutor, dr Thomas Jacques had pleaded, in support of a period of parole ineligibility of 150 years, that “the impact of the crimes (Alexander Bissonnette) are similar to those of the crime of terrorism.”
The justice François Huot found that there was no case where the court has taken account of the offence of terrorism as an aggravating factor without the presence of a formal charge of a crime of terrorism.
The experts who met with Alexander Bissonnette assess that the killer “had fantasies of grandiose and wanted to accomplish a coup for not to fall into the oblivion”, to quote the judge. According to the psychologist of the defence Marc-André Lamontagne, the primary cause of the passage to the act is the hopelessness and not the promotion of a particular ideology.
The expert for the prosecution, the psychiatrist Dr. Gilles Chamberland is also convinced that Bissonnette acted for strictly for personal and non-ideological.
The justice François Huot considers that the evidence as a whole corroborates the opinions of experts.
“[The killer] had fantasies of grandiose and wanted to accomplish a burst in order not to fall into oblivion ”
The justice François Huot of the superior Court, in its judgment,
In his research on the web before the killing, the murderer has investigated so much on the feminist movement than about the killings in schools, in malls and in airports.
“In addition, it should be recalled that the accused presented himself to a shopping centre, a well-known (Laurier Québec, N.D.L.R.) on November 26, prior in the intention of killing as many people as possible, regardless of their race, ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, or sexual orientation,” remarked the judge Huot.
To the contrary, the judge Huot had no hesitation to accept another aggravating circumstance; the racist motivation of crimes “motivated by a deep-rooted hate against immigrants of muslim faith,” wrote the judge.
Bissonnette had confided to a friend that, in his opinion, Canada should ban immigrants from countries dangerous, for fear that terrorists do not slip in among them. It has targeted a place of worship, a mosque, which “evinces a hatred unfathomable” for islam, writes the judge, and has deployed extreme violence, which betrays “an aversion pathological and unquenchable for the muslims.”