One night in Gatineau: the trial of Joey Therrien-Rivers and Hugo Petit

Tashi Farmilo

It began as an ordinary summer evening at a Gatineau restaurant and ended, nearly three years later, with two men weeping in a packed courtroom and a judge declaring that the truth of what happened that night could not be established beyond a reasonable doubt.

On the evening of June 22, 2023, the first complainant and a group of her friends arrived at Sans Façon, a restaurant owned by Joey Therrien-Rivers. She had been seeing Therrien-Rivers casually for a few weeks. Her friends left as the night wore on, but she stayed, intending to sleep at his place. The second complainant was also at the restaurant that evening. When the restaurant closed, Therrien-Rivers and his longtime friend Hugo Petit, a lawyer, headed to Therrien-Rivers' condominium with both women.

What happened there became the central dispute of the entire case, and the two sides told irreconcilable stories about it.

The first complainant testified that her memory of the condo had significant gaps. She told the court she believed she may have been drugged, though she could not be certain. It was only the following morning, she said, that fragmented recollections began to surface. She described breaking down in front of her mother, going silent for ten minutes, crying, and feeling deep shame. The defence, in cross-examination, pointed to inconsistencies with her initial police statement, a follow-up video statement, her preliminary inquiry testimony in late 2024, and what she said at trial. She acknowledged that some details had shifted as memories returned, and that on other points she simply could not recall.

The second complainant said that upon arriving at the condo, the first complainant had been vomiting and appeared so unsteady that they agreed she should go straight to bed. She then described what she characterized as a consensual encounter with Petit on the living room couch but also alleged that Therrien-Rivers emerged from his bedroom multiple times and that during one of those moments, while she was undressed and vulnerable, he assaulted her.

Therrien-Rivers took the stand himself. He described the night as festive, insisted everyone present had been on the same page, and said Petit had later entered the bedroom without warning to join him and the first complainant. Petit did not testify.

The trial cracked open decisively on its fourth day. Under cross-examination, the second complainant acknowledged she had consented to a sexual relationship with Petit. The Crown prosecutors, having heard that admission, advised the court the following day that they could no longer prove the charges related to the second complainant beyond a reasonable doubt, and sought directed acquittals on two of the three counts. She effectively became a witness rather than a complainant, and one charge remained.

Judge Mark Philippe of the Quebec Court returned on April 29 to deliver his verdict on that final count. After more than an hour reviewing the evidence, he concluded that reasonable doubt existed on the question of consent. He was careful to note that his role was not to decide whose version was more credible, only whether the essential element of the offence had been proven. He found it had not. He added that genuine confusion remained about the sequence of events that night, declared both men not guilty, and brought the proceedings to a close.

The ruling had originally been scheduled for April 21, but a power outage that struck part of downtown Gatineau, including the courthouse, had forced a week-long delay.

When the words finally came, Petit broke down in tears and held onto Therrien-Rivers as the gallery, filled with family and friends, looked on. Neither complainant was present to hear the decision.

Outside the courtroom, defence lawyer Michel Swanston did not hold back. He described the intervening years as devastating. Therrien-Rivers, he said, had been forced to sell all three of his Outaouais restaurants, Le Foubrac, Sans Façon, and Meech & Munch, because customers stopped coming once the accusations became public. Petit had been stripped of his ability to practise law in the city; his firm had cut ties with him the day his arrest was reported; and, the Barreau du Québec had renewed restrictions on his licence three times over. He had been compelled to relocate and work under tight limitations, far from the career he had built.

Swanston argued that social media had rendered its own verdict long before any judge could, and that the presumption of innocence had been effectively discarded in the court of public opinion. He said justice had been done, and that the court had accepted what the defence had argued throughout.

The Crown indicated it would review the written judgement before deciding whether to appeal any of the acquittals. Whether Therrien-Rivers or Petit will pursue legal action of their own remains an open question, with their lawyer noting both men would need time before making any such decision.

What is not in dispute is that all four people who left that restaurant together on the night of June 22, 2023, have had their lives irrevocably altered by what followed.