Claude Paquin, a man from Quebec who was wrongly convicted of a double murder and later acquitted after 41 years, has reached a significant settlement with Montreal and the provincial government. The agreement, announced by all three parties in a joint statement on Friday, aims to help Mr. Paquin move on from this challenging period in his life without undergoing a lengthy trial scheduled for this fall.
In 1983, Paquin was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder related to the deaths of Ronald Bourgouin and Sylvie Revah, a couple murdered in the Laurentians in 1978. He served 18 years in prison before being released on full parole in 2001 under strict conditions that lasted for the next 23 years. In 2024, the federal justice minister ordered a retrial based on new case information suggesting a potential miscarriage of justice. Paquin, now 83 years old, was acquitted on November 6, 2024.
Paquin credited his acquittal to the diligent efforts of his legal team from Projet Innocence Québec. The case against him heavily relied on the testimony of Bernard Provençal, a police informant whose credibility was later questioned by Projet Innocence Québec.
Represented by Woods LLP lawyers, Paquin filed a multimillion-dollar civil lawsuit in Quebec Superior Court in May 2025 against the City of Montreal and the Attorney General of Quebec, alleging failures by their agents, including the Montreal police, Sûreté du Québec, and the Quebec Crown prosecutor’s office. The lawsuit claimed that authorities were aware since 1983 that the informant’s testimony was false and that any physical evidence linking Paquin to the crime had been fabricated or tampered with.
His legal team described the case as not just a miscarriage of justice but as “the story of a stolen life,” emphasizing the prolonged impact of his wrongful conviction beyond his years in prison. Although the lawsuit sought damages of over $89 million, the exact settlement amount remains confidential due to a nondisclosure agreement.
Since the lawsuit was resolved out of court, the claims were not subject to judicial review, and the involved parties have agreed not to provide further comments on the matter.