A Joliette Businessman’s No-Murder Mystery: Acquitted of Attempted Murder!
A Joliette businessman was acquitted of attempted murder of a lawyer due to insufficient evidence.
Published yesterday at 8:37 p.m.
Ah, the courtroom; a place where confusion reigns supreme and logic takes its final bow. Just when you think you’ve got a killer instinct for truth, along comes a case that proves you actually need a proper instruction manual. The latest episode in the ongoing true crime saga involves none other than Jean-François Malo, a real estate developer with a thespian flair—well, at least when it comes to his apparent choice of cast: henchmen!
According to the court, the evidence presented thus far has led to the conclusion that our leading man, Malo, didn’t know that his so-called “henchmen” were packing heat, nor was he in cahoots with them to murder defense lawyer Nicholas Daudelin. Make a note, folks: henchmen should come with a handbook—Training 101: Bring Your Own Gun.
But wait! It doesn’t seem that all is lost for Malo just yet. As the judge, Denys Noël, sauntered through the evidence like a conductor leading an orchestra of questionable morals, he did decide that Malo’s hiring practices warranted a solid accusation of serious assault. It appears our dear developer had a bit of a ‘Henchmen Hiring’ mishap that resulted in some rather serious injuries for Mr. Daudelin. “Hiring someone to sweet-talk the victim is so last season,” Noël might have quipped if he had the comedic timing of Ricky Gervais—though I doubt he’d be keen on the applause.
Fast forward to six days prior to the shooting—our man Malo took a hefty legal hit when he was served a “big sandwich of courtroom justice” from Judge Daudelin. Note to future henchmen: when your boss is having a rough day in court, perhaps don’t show up with a gun. It’s just bad timing!
Adding to the drama, evidence emerged showing Malo’s previous ‘bright ideas’—one involving the instruction to “hit a bailiff” to “send him to the hospital.” Now, let’s roll back for a moment—here’s a standing ovation for creative thinking in the criminal arts! I mean, who wants to kill someone when there’s always the option to ‘seriously injure’ them instead? Surely that’s an act of kindness in the twisted world of crime.
Despite finding a glove with Malo’s DNA near the crime scene—Stockholm Syndrome for criminals—Judge Noël burst the bubble of guilt. It seems he couldn’t connect the dots enough to inspire a conviction. It’s like a detective finding a bloody dagger and concluding it must just be a prop from the latest crime drama.
In a final act of courtroom theatrics, Nicholas Daudelin himself took the stand, stating that when he felt the sting of the bullet—a great way to ruin a good day—his first instinct was to point his finger at Malo. Talk about a well-prepared defense tactic!
Now, as we close the curtain on this intriguing drama, we’re left wondering about the real question: will the judge ultimately decide if the Crown can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. Malo committed a serious assault? And honestly, if the man can’t successfully orchestrate a ‘kill the lawyer’ plot—what’s next? A career in stand-up comedy?
Credit: Patrick Sanfaçon, La Presse Archives
A businessman from Joliette has been acquitted of attempted murder charges against lawyer Nicholas Daudelin due to a lack of sufficient evidence.
Published yesterday at 8:37 p.m.
The evidence presented throughout the trial failed to convincingly demonstrate that the accused, real estate developer Jean-François Malo, had prior knowledge that a firearm would be used in the alleged attack, or that he intended to kill Daudelin, Judge Denys Noël stated in his ruling on Friday at the courthouse in Saint-Hyacinthe.
Despite the acquittal on the attempted murder charge, the prosecution’s evidence was substantial enough to allow the trial to progress regarding a serious assault charge against Nicholas Daudelin. Judge Noël argued that it is reasonable to believe that Mr. Malo understood that enlisting henchmen to assault the lawyer could result in significant injuries.
“Moreover, his reaction after the crime confirms his state of mind and the order he gave,” added Judge Noël, highlighting the gravity of Malo’s actions.
On March 26, 2020, Nicholas Daudelin was shot in the leg at the entrance of his residence in Mont-Saint-Hilaire. The Crown alleged that Jean-François Malo orchestrated a plot to kill the lawyer, who was representing the Desjardins Movement in a legal dispute against Malo at the time.
Six days prior to the shooting, Daudelin secured a judicial ruling that was highly unfavorable to Malo, possibly motivating the crime.
The accused supposedly hired two individuals, Cheikh Ahmed Tidiane Ndiaye and Daouda Dieng, to carry out the assault against Daudelin. Reports indicate that they did not have any prior acquaintance with the lawyer, underscoring the premeditated nature of the attack.
Evidence introduced during the trial included a previous communication between Malo and one of his collaborators, revealing that Malo had previously instructed to “hit a bailiff” with the intent to “send him to the hospital,” indicating a preference for severe injury rather than fatal intent.
“This element does not allow me to infer a different intention for the aggression towards Daudelin,” the judge noted in his decision, reinforcing the characterization of the assault as serious rather than lethal.
A glove containing the accused’s DNA was also discovered near the ammunition owned by one of his accomplices. However, the judge pointed out that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the glove was utilized in relation to the crime in question.
During his testimony on October 17, Nicholas Daudelin recounted that upon being shot, he immediately thought of Mr. Malo as the orchestrator of the violent act.
At the conclusion of the trial, the judge will be tasked with determining whether the Crown has successfully demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed serious assault against Mr. Daudelin.
Interview: Insights Into the Acquittal of Jean-François Malo
Host: Welcome back to our news segment. Today, we’re diving into the intriguing case of Jean-François Malo, a Joliette businessman recently acquitted of attempted murder charges against lawyer Nicholas Daudelin. Let’s hear from our guest, legal expert and commentator, Dr. Julia Ratcliffe. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Ratcliffe.
Dr. Ratcliffe: Thank you for having me!
Host: To start, can you give us a brief overview of why the court ruled that Malo was not guilty of attempted murder?
Dr. Ratcliffe: Certainly! The key reason for the acquittal, as highlighted by Judge Denys Noël, was the insufficiency of evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Malo had prior knowledge that his henchmen were armed or that he intended to kill Daudelin. The court found no definitive connection that would confirm his involvement in an attempted murder.
Host: It seems there were some questionable hiring practices on Malo’s part that led to serious assault charges. How significant are these findings in the context of the case?
Dr. Ratcliffe: Extremely significant! While Malo was acquitted of the attempted murder charge, the evidence did suggest that he understood enlisting individuals to assault Daudelin could lead to severe injuries. The judge noted that Malo’s reaction post-crime indicated a state of mind that acknowledged the potential for harm, which is critical in determining accountability in this context.
Host: We also heard about previous incidents involving Malo that raised eyebrows. How do those past actions factor into the current case?
Dr. Ratcliffe: The previous incidents certainly create a pattern of behavior that the court considered. For instance, the court referenced earlier instructions Malo allegedly gave to harm individuals, which might imply a reckless disregard for the law. Such context can influence perceptions of character and intent, even if they’re not directly linked to the current charges.
Host: With the high-profile nature of the case and Daudelin’s transition from lawyer to judge, what implications could this have for public perception of the legal system?
Dr. Ratcliffe: It raises important questions about the integrity and reliability of legal proceedings. The fact that a high-profile businessman could evade a murder charge due to evidential gaps can lead to concerns about justice and accountability. Many may question whether the legal system adequately protects victims, particularly when it comes to those with resources to mount a robust defense.
Host: As the trial continues for the serious assault charge, what are the next steps for both parties involved?
Dr. Ratcliffe: The prosecution will need to present stronger evidence to support the serious assault charge against Malo, as the burden of proof is still on them. On the other hand, Malo’s defense team will likely continue to challenge the validity of any accusations while preparing to counter the assault claim. The case is far from over, and it remains to be seen how the ongoing proceedings will unfold.
Host: Thank you, Dr. Ratcliffe, for your insights. The case of Jean-François Malo certainly adds another chapter to the ongoing discourse on justice and accountability. We’ll keep an eye on the developments.
Dr. Ratcliffe: Thank you! It’s been a pleasure discussing this fascinating yet troubling case.
This have for the legal community moving forward?
Dr. Ratcliffe: That’s a great question. The transition of Nicholas Daudelin from lawyer to judge adds a fascinating layer to the case. It raises concerns about the safety of legal professionals who take unpopular stances in court. If lawyers feel threatened or unsafe due to past rulings, as appears to be the case here, it could deter attorneys from fully advocating for their clients. The legal community may need to address the potential for retaliation against lawyers taking principled stands, ensuring there are adequate protections in place.
Host: as the case continues regarding serious assault charges, what should we expect to see in the coming days?
Dr. Ratcliffe: We’ll be looking at further evidence presented by the prosecution to establish whether Malo’s actions constituted serious assault. The burden of proof lies with the Crown to demonstrate that he understood the implications of hiring henchmen, which could result in significant harm. Judge Noël’s forthcoming decisions will be pivotal, as they will guide how the legal standards are applied in terms of accountability for such actions. This case sets precedents that could affect how similar future cases are handled regarding intent and culpability.
Host: Thank you, Dr. Ratcliffe, for your insights into this complex case. We appreciate you joining us today and providing clarity on the legal implications.
Dr. Ratcliffe: Thank you for having me!
Host: Stay tuned as we continue to follow this unfolding story and its ramifications in the legal world.
