Karl Audet: repentant pedophile or incorrigible predator?

Who is Karl Audet? A pedophile who has finally admitted his deviance and wants to take back his life in hand or an irreducible sexual predator?
The ‘re short hair standing on end, his eyes hidden by tinted glasses, Audet, 37, expects – again – to know his fate in the holding box. He is wearing a simple white t-shirt. His tight jaw is marked by a thin beard necklace.

After a few years of anonymous crime, Karl Audet made his name in 2012 when, with his wife Julie Viel at the time, he had set a trap for a 9 year old child. The couple had managed to attract the girl home and Audet could touch the vulva of the child and make a short pornographic video. Audet pleaded guilty, but denied any deviation.

For his crime, Audet was sentenced in 2014 to a five-year sentence of which half remained to be served. A correctional report tabled in court on Monday said he has served his entire sentence.

The offender’s detention period was extended by six months because he was caught in his cell in the penitentiary with child pornography photos hidden in a Bible. Again, Audet said that the images were intended for sale to fellow prisoners, not to satisfy his instincts.

In September 2017, Karl Audet joined Marcel-Caron Transition House in Quebec City. It is subject to long-term surveillance for another 10 years.

In the spring of 2018, Audet is caught using a smartphone, a device prohibited by the rules of the halfway house. A few weeks ago, Google had denounced the downloading of child pornography files by Karl Audet’s device.

It was this last offense that brought Audet back to court. He pleaded guilty in August 2018 to the possession of 137 child pornography files.

Recognized problem

The Crown prosecutor M e Michel Bérubé filed to the court the investigation of the SQ report where the details of the uploaded photos. The heart of the reader is tightened by browsing the description of the abuse imposed on very small girls (1 year to 8 years), forced to have sex with adults under the eye of a camera.

In testimony, Karl Audet apologized to his direct and indirect victims.

It was the first time on Monday, he said, that he acknowledged being a pedophile aloud.

The sexual assault he says he suffered at the age of 5 excuses nothing, he admits, but explains, in his eyes, his deviant behavior.

After years of lies, why should Judge Christian Boulet, who will impose his new sentence, believe it? asked the defense counsel, M e Mathieu Métivier. “My journey is not the same, I’m tired of hiding in the lie and I have plans,” says the inmate looking at his wife sitting a few meters from him, in an almost empty courtroom.

Police officers fighting child pornography are becoming collateral victims of cybercollector crimes.

“I do not want to hear any more about it.” Detective Sergeant Jean-René Rouleau has seen all the colors during his 22 years at the Quebec City Police Department.

But his three years of child pornography investigations brought him to the end of what he was able to do. “It affects the daily,” summarizes the investigator, a brief tone.

Like his colleagues, the Detective Sergeant had to categorize the images captured in the suspects’ computer equipment. He has watched thousands of degrading images to decide which constitutes child pornography within the meaning of the law.

The rules governing the work of categorization are strict; investigators do not categorize them just after leaving their families in the morning or just before finding them at night. They must avoid looking at an image for too long a period of time so that it does not print permanently in memory. And no background music that could come to associate with the images.

The psychological follow-up with the investigators is tight. Nevertheless, many abandon this assignment. And for those who resist, a break is mandatory after a few years.

The Crown prosecutor M e Michel Bérubé wanted to go further on the consequences for the police to view such “toxic” material. “It seems to me that to hear the policeman tell you,” I’m not able to do any more. “It shows you what it can do to a human being,” argued the prosecutor. “Had it not been for the actions of the accused, a police officer would not have to endure that and reorient his career.”

The defense lawyer M e Mathieu Métivier did not see the relevance of the questions which, according to him, were aimed at further color back in his Karl Audet customer.

Judge Christian Boulet of the Court of Quebec assured to be well aware of the consequences inherent in viewing “degrading, disgusting images”. “But I can not give two more months to the accused because the police had to reorient his career,” notes the judge welcoming the objection.

Share
Previous Article
Next Article