Me Sébastien Gagnon

Recent successes

• Perjury and acquittal

  In a case where the client was charged with perjury, the defense conducted two intense cross-examinations of the prosecution’s witnesses, highlighting significant contradictions in their statements. Following these cross-examinations, a motion for lack of evidence was filed and vigorously argued by Me Gagnon. The judge was convinced that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to justify a conviction, and the client was acquitted, thus avoiding a criminal conviction.

• Assault on a child and acquittal

  In a case where the client was accused of assaulting a child, the defense conducted rigorous cross-examinations of the prosecution’s witnesses. These examinations exposed contradictions, inconsistencies, and implausibilities in the testimonies. By demonstrating these weaknesses in the evidence, Me Gagnon convinced the judge that there was reasonable doubt about the client’s guilt, leading to an acquittal and avoiding a criminal conviction.

• Impaired driving and charges withdrawn

  In a case where the client was charged with impaired driving, Me Gagnon raised the issue of unreasonable delay during the arrest and the vehicle’s towing. By arguing the client’s constitutional rights, particularly under the Charter, he showed that these delays compromised the validity of the procedure. As a result, the charges were withdrawn, allowing the client to avoid a criminal conviction and its consequences.

• Sexual assault and acquittal

  In a case involving sexual assault charges, Me Gagnon filed a motion for unreasonable delay, arguing that his client’s rights had been violated due to delays in the judicial process. After the defense presented this motion and advanced constitutional arguments, the court pronounced an acquittal. The client received a peace bond but avoided a criminal conviction while agreeing to certain conditions.

• Sexual assault and charges withdrawn

  In another sexual assault case, the charges were withdrawn at the start of the trial. Through rigorous pre-trial questioning, the defense highlighted numerous contradictions in the prosecution’s testimonies and evidence. Thanks to this demonstration of weaknesses in the case, the Crown prosecutor decided to withdraw the charges, sparing the client from trial and criminal conviction.