The fate of Michael Applebaum is now in the hands of the judge presiding over his trial and her decision will come down in late January.
The defence concluded its final arguments today after starting on Monday following seven days of testimony and the crown's closing arguments. Applebaum did not testify in his own defence.
The ex-Montreal mayor stood trial on 14 charges including corruption, breach of trust and conspiracy in connection with two real estate projects in the Côte-des-Neiges/NDG borough during Applebaum's time as mayor there.
The defence painstakingly went over pages of police notes about conversations between anti-corruption investigators and the crown's key witness, Hugo Tremblay, Applebaum's ex-chief of staff.
Defence lawyer Pierre Teasdale said while some of the chats were about the case, many more were about Tremblay's personal life and work as well as about other cases investigated by the anti-corruption unit, UPAC. Teasdale said many of the conversations took place frequently and long after Applebaum was arrested in 2013.
Teasdale argued that Tremblay's apparent keen interest in the UPAC cases shows his concern about testifying and being charged himself , which he never was.
Teasdale said conversations about Tremblay's family life, job, mental health, holidays and other persona topics are indication of how close he was with police and how abnormal the relationship was.
Teasdale said we only have Tremblay's word on a lot of alleged events including cash transactions with entrepreneurs to greenlight a housing development zoning change and a maintenance contract for the borough's sports complex. Teasdale has also called into question the trustworthiness of other main witnesses, saying they and Tremblay were only out to save their own skin.
Teasdale said there are a lot of grey areas and inferences and for the judge to make an interpretation would be to make a double interpretation which is "extremely dangerous."
Teasdale said the ultimate question is, did Applebaum through his actions collect cash transactions in these circumstances?
In her rebuttal, crown prosecutor Nathalie Kleber said the defence did not prove Tremblay's relationship with police was out of the ordinary and that describing that relationship is subjective.
Kleber argued that the witnesses were frank and upfront in their testimony about why they didn't become collaborating witnesses, which would have involved a lie detector test and that the defence thoroughly cross-examined them.
Kleber said the inferences are logical and that the judge can consider some or all of the testimony.
Quebec Court Judge Louise Vaillancourt renders her decision January 26.