In Canada, one in three sexual crimes happen to kids under 18. This fact is very important today in Quebec. A former national skiing coach, Bertrand Charest, got a 12-year sentence for harming young athletes he was supposed to help.
The trial was after years of looking into his actions with young athletes. Judge Sylvain Lépine said the skiing community needed better protection. He also pointed out Charest didn’t show any remorse. Charest has already served seven years and 10 months, so he has seven more years to go.
This case shook the world of Canadian sports. It showed how a coach can abuse their power over young athletes. Nine survivors, aged 12 to 18, shared how Charest broke their trust. Their stories led to 37 guilty verdicts, including sexual assault and exploitation.
This sentence matches what the Crown asked for. It shows a clear message of responsibility. It also starts a new chapter for better safety in sports, as everyone wants a safer place for all skiers.
Sentencing Overview in Saint-Jérôme, Quebec
In Saint-Jérôme, Quebec, a major legal case came to a close. The sentencing was public, showing the seriousness of the sexual abuse by a trusted coach. This abuse harmed young athletes in Canada deeply.
Judge Sylvain Lépine’s ruling and rationale
Judge Sylvain Lépine made a clear decision. He focused on the power imbalance and the victims’ ages. He said a coach’s authority and trust make these crimes very serious.
His words highlighted the need to condemn and prevent such crimes in Canada. He also talked about the lasting effects on the victims.
Time served and remaining sentence (seven years and 10 months)
The former coach has seven years and ten months left to serve. This is after crediting time from March 2015. It matches the 12-year term given in Saint-Jérôme.
This shows the time he has already spent in jail. It’s part of the journey towards his final sentence.
Crown’s 12-year request and court alignment
The court agreed with the Crown’s 12-year request. This was after looking at the aggravating factors. These included the victims’ ages and a 15-year-old’s pregnancy that ended in an abortion.
Details of the ruling are in coverage from Montreal. The evidence played a big role in shaping the legal case and the final sentence.
Context within Canadian legal standards for sexual offences
In Canada, the 12-year term is near the top for sexual crimes like this. It’s below the 14-year maximum. The sentence reflects the seriousness of the abuse in sports.
It aims to balance fairness with the need to protect children. It also aims to maintain trust in institutions.
| Element | Detail | Relevance to Legal Standards in Canada |
|---|---|---|
| Location | Saint-Jérôme, Quebec | Provincial court jurisdiction for the court trial and sentencing |
| Judge | Sylvain Lépine | Ruling emphasized denunciation, deterrence, and harm to victims |
| Total Sentence | 12 years | Aligned with Crown request and within statutory limits |
| Time Served | About 4 years and 2 months | Credit applied from March 2015 detention |
| Time Remaining | 7 years and 10 months | Reflects custodial balance after credit |
| Maximum Penalty | 14 years | Positions the sentence near the upper range for sexual offences |
| Aggravating Factors | Victims’ young ages; abuse under coaching authority; pregnancy and abortion | Supports higher range sentencing for a child sex abuser |
| Convictions | 37 counts related to sexual abuse and exploitation | Volume and persistence justified the court’s approach in the legal case |
Background on the Criminal Charges and Trial
In Canada, the case against Bertrand Charest started with a big police file. It turned into a focused court trial. The trial looked into years of alleged sexual abuse linked to a famous coaching scandal.
Convictions on 37 charges including sexual assault and sexual exploitation
Judge Sylvain Lépine found Charest guilty on 37 counts. These included sexual assault and sexual exploitation. The trial focused on nine women who were part of elite skiing programs.
Prosecutors showed how team travel and coaching power led to harm.
Timeline of offences between 1991 and 1998
The crimes happened between 1991 and 1998. Charest was moving up in coaching roles during this time. This period included major training and international events, raising questions about oversight in Canada’s ski system.
From arrest in March 2015 to June convictions
Charest was arrested in March 2015 and stayed in jail. In June, the court found him guilty. This was a major step in a long process with witness testimony and expert evidence.
Acquittals, non-jurisdiction counts, and total charges initially filed
Originally, there were over fifty sex-related charges. But the judge found 18 of them not guilty. Two counts were dropped because they happened abroad. This narrowed the trial’s focus to the core allegations of sexual abuse in a Canadian coaching scandal.
Victim Impact Statements and Ongoing Harm
In court, former athletes shared their stories. Their victim impact statements showed the damage of sexual abuse in canadian sports. It’s clear how this legal case affects their lives every day.
Ages of Victims
Nine girls and young women were between 12 and 18 at the time. They met a trusted coach during important times in canadian sports. For a young canadian skier, this is when they need adults the most.
Psychological and Health Consequences
They talked about panic, insomnia, and years of therapy in their victim impact statements. Some mentioned suicidal thoughts, stress, and problems with intimacy and eating. These issues lasted long after the legal case started.
Shame, Loss of Trust, and Life-Long Effects
Many felt their trust was broken. One said their childhood was taken by a predator. Another talked about living with shame and guilt. They linked the sexual abuse to broken relationships, lost studies, and fear in canadian sports.
Survivor Courage and Testimony
Judge Sylvain Lépine praised their courage in reporting sexual abuse. Some came to sentencing in person, others by video. Their stories were key to understanding the harm and making canadian sports safer for young athletes.
Judge’s Condemnation and Key Quotes
The courtroom fell silent as judge Sylvain Lépine spoke. He clearly linked the sentencing to the harms shown in the trial. He highlighted how sexual abuse affects each survivor’s life and dignity.
“Not acceptable in 2017, 1998, or ever”
Judge Sylvain Lépine delivered a strong rebuke from the bench. He said the conduct was unacceptable at any time. This statement supported a strong sentence for the lasting harm caused by sexual abuse.
Assessment of Charest’s lack of remorse and denial of therapy
The judge noted a lack of remorse. He pointed out the offender’s remarks and refusal to seek therapy. The court trial considered this heavily. Judge Sylvain Lépine said true accountability requires understanding the effects of sexual abuse.
Global and timeless criminality of the conduct
Judge Sylvain Lépine said the acts are crimes everywhere and at any time. He called them a universal wrong against bodily integrity. This view reflected the court trial’s evidence on the lasting harm of sexual abuse.
| Theme | Key Quote or Finding | Relevance to Sentencing | Court Trial Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeless Condemnation | “Not acceptable in 2017, 1998, or ever.” | Supports denunciation and deterrence | Aligns with long-standing norms on sexual abuse |
| Lack of Remorse | Minimization and refusal of therapy | Aggravating factor in determining length | Weighed against rehabilitation prospects |
| Global Criminality | Recognized as unlawful across countries | Reinforces seriousness of offences | Consistent with international standards |
| Victim Harm | Infringement on bodily integrity | Justifies a strong custodial response | Corroborated by testimony and records |
Defence Response and Appeal Plans
The defence lawyer outlined next steps in the legal case after the sentencing drew national focus in Canada. He framed the path ahead as measured and tied to established appeal rights.
Defence request for a 4–6 year sentence and reaction
Defence lawyer Antonio Cabral urged a four- to six-year range at sentencing. He noted the defendant had no prior criminal record and had not offended again. He expressed surprise at the 12-year term given in Canada.
Cabral said he will review the written reasons in detail. He noted the legal case demands careful study before any next filing.
Argument about limited comments due to ongoing appeal
Cabral explained that limited statements during assessments stemmed from an active appeal of the convictions. He argued that this stance should not be read as a lack of remorse, but as a standard step in a high-stakes legal case.
The defence lawyer emphasized that appellate rights allow restraint in remarks while the record is under review in Canada.
Conditional release request pending appeal
The defence confirmed plans to appeal and to seek conditional release while the Quebec Court of Appeal evaluates the file. Cabral cited a low risk of flight and no danger to the public as factors the court could weigh in Canada.
He noted that sentencing outcomes can be revisited on appeal, and that interim release is a recognized safeguard in a complex legal case.
| Issue | Defence Position | Rationale | Process in Canada |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requested sentence | 4–6 years | No prior record; no reoffending | Put to the court at sentencing |
| Reaction to 12 years | Respectful but surprised | Length exceeds defence range | Detailed reasons reviewed post-judgment |
| Appeal intent | Proceed with appeal | Challenge to June convictions | Filed to the Quebec Court of Appeal |
| Limited comments | Strategic restraint | Active appeal requires care | Common in ongoing legal case evaluations |
| Conditional release | Seek pending appeal | Low flight risk; public safety | Reviewed by appellate court |
Crown Perspective and Reaction from Prosecutors
Crown prosecutors see the sentence as a clear message from the court. They believe it shows the seriousness of child sex abuse in Canada. It also highlights the need to protect young athletes.
Why the 12-year sentence was sought
Prosecutors Marie-Nathalie Tremblay and Caroline Lafleur wanted 12 years. They looked at the record and the harm done. They pointed out the pattern of abuse across victims and the control shown.
After sentencing, Tremblay said it met their request. She added that such behavior has no place in Canada.
Authority over minors and aggravating factors
The Crown focused on the abuse of power over minors. They explained how the power imbalance affected each victim. They also mentioned the number of victims, their young ages, and a pregnancy at 15 that ended in an abortion.
These factors were why the Crown pushed for a strong sentence.
Victim satisfaction with the outcome
Several survivors attended the hearing, while others joined by video. They felt heard and satisfied with the sentence. For many, the court’s stance against child sex abuse brought validation.
Alpine Canada’s Role and Institutional Accountability
The coaching scandal brought attention to the national ski federation’s role. In Canadian sports, trust in these systems relies on strong safeguards and quick action. This is true when warnings about coaches are raised.
Findings that the federation failed to protect athletes
Judge Sylvain Lépine found Alpine Canada and its leaders failed to protect young athletes. They ignored reports, didn’t believe young women, and hid facts. There was no safety for skiers in risky situations.
This news hit hard in Canadian sports. It showed how power, closeness, and silence can affect a coaching career. This happens when there’s no oversight.
Martha Hall Findlay’s apology to victims
Board chair Martha Hall Findlay apologized to the athletes. She said the organization put itself first and failed the athletes. She thanked those who spoke out, saying their bravery led to change within Alpine Canada.
The apology aimed to regain trust from families, clubs, and teams. They expect the ski federation to act quickly and prioritize athlete safety.
Policy and procedure changes following the case
Alpine Canada is making changes, inspired by independent SafeSport systems. They want to avoid conflicts of interest with external reporting and investigations. They’re focusing on clearer codes, stronger checks, and mandatory training in Canadian sports.
The goal is to address the risks highlighted by the scandal. These include tight travel, unequal power, and access tied to coaching. Athletes should be able to pursue high performance safely.
Coaching Career and Access to Athletes
Bertrand Charest, a ski coach, worked with top athletes in Canadian sports. He was part of national and provincial programs. This gave him close contact with athletes, which was at the heart of a big scandal.
Positions: national junior team, Quebec Ski Team, Team Laurentians, Mont-Tremblant Ski Club
Charest was with the Canadian national junior ski team and others. He worked with athletes during camps, trips, and races. This close work was common in Canadian sports.
Work with Alpine Canada’s women’s development team (1996–1998)
From 1996 to 1998, he was with Alpine Canada’s women’s team. Court records show some of the incidents happened then. For more on how sports responded, see the Responsible Coaching Movement and reforms.
Power dynamics and proximity in elite sport environments
In elite sports, coaches have a lot of power. They control schedules and who gets to join teams. This power, along with travel and living arrangements, made athletes dependent on coaches. The court looked into how this imbalance led to a big scandal in Canadian sports.
Implications for Canadian Sports and Safe Sport Reforms
In Canada, the Charest case made everyone think about how sports handle risks and trust. It showed the need for SafeSport standards and better ways to stop sexual abuse. Alpine Canada said it was time for change and started working on new systems.
How cases like this inform safeguarding frameworks
Now, safeguarding focuses on clear rules, care, and regular checks. There are strict policies on travel, medical access, and personal contact. Independent checks, athlete feedback, and open reporting make sure these rules work everywhere in Canada.
Independent reporting and investigation models
Survivors and witnesses need safe ways to report. Independent management, checks for bias, and interviews that respect trauma help. Public updates and data tracking build trust while keeping privacy safe, as the ski federation promised.
Educating coaches, athletes, and parents on boundaries and reporting
Teaching is key. Coaches learn about power, boundaries, and reporting. Athletes and parents know how to report concerns and what protection means. Clear contact points, easy guides, and updates keep Canadian sports up to date with SafeSport.
Legal Case Milestones and What Comes Next
This legal case in Canada went through a tight court trial schedule. It ended with a significant sentencing in Saint-Jérôme. Now, the appeal is the focus, with timelines set by the Quebec Court of Appeal. Rules on custody and credit will shape the near future.
From charges to conviction to sentencing
The accused was arrested in March 2015 and held in detention. In June, the court found them guilty on 37 counts involving nine victims. This was from a larger set of 56–57 charges.
After the verdicts, the judge sentenced them to 12 years in Saint-Jérôme. This sentence was crafted within Canadian law, from charges to guilt to punishment.
Appeal trajectory and possible timelines
The defence has filed an appeal in Canada. They will ask for conditional release pending the appeal. If approved, the release could include reporting, non-contact orders, and geographic limits.
Appeal timelines can take months. This is because of the time needed for transcripts, factums, and hearing dates. Prosecutors say the sentence reflects the case’s gravity and will respond within the court’s schedule.
Conditions of detention and time-credit calculations
Detention remains custodial until any appeal decision changes it. The court has applied time-credit calculations for pre-sentence custody. This leaves seven years and 10 months to serve.
The sentence is below the 14-year maximum mentioned in court. Yet, it aligns with Canada’s standards for denunciation and deterrence. Adjustments will depend on appeal rulings and statutory credits.
Conclusion
Bertrand Charest’s 12-year sentence in Canada shows athlete safety is a top priority. Judge Sylvain Lépine highlighted the lasting harm and abuse of power in the case. The court agreed with the Crown, while the defence plans to appeal and seek release.
The message is clear: in Canadian sports, sexual abuse is a crime everywhere and always. Survivors’ stories were key in this case. They showed how control, secrecy, and fear can shape a team culture.
But they also showed how truth can change that culture. Alpine Canada apologized and promised to change, showing governance must evolve when it fails young athletes.
The outcome changes expectations in Canadian sports. Now, independent reporting, trauma-informed investigations, and education for all are essential. Systems must lower risk, track complaints, and act quickly when signs of trouble appear.
This case is a starting point, not the end. It sets a standard for accountability and guides the work ahead. Protecting athletes requires constant vigilance, clear rules, and following through on promises.
With Charest’s sentencing, Canada has set a high standard. It emphasizes empowering reporting, keeping investigations open, and supporting survivors at every step.