3 years…


Three years ago today, Renee Wathelet was murdered in her condo in Isla Mujeres near Cancun, Mexico. A particularly brutal and barbaric murder.

The proceedings of the case are now stricken with a publication ban by the Mexican authorities. Even the family can’t have access to the documents related to the appeal of the assassin. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed the family of the judicial decisions, but nothing can be confirmed in a formal manner. This also violates the family’s rights in regard to Mexican laws. Although the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) ensures that its priority is that the family is treated as Mexican nationals, when this is not the case, nothing is done.

Since Renée Wathelet’s assassin sentencing in December 2010, the family have been unable tspeak to anyone regarding this case in the Mexican judicial system to ensure proper follow-up. Canadian consular officials have faced the same issues when they have tried to provide a proper follow-up, but did got a bit further. They have managed to get a few information that are subject to a ban on publication and clear instructions not to transmit any of the documents received to the family.

The last reply from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DFAIT) to the requests of the family was received the June 14, 2012, for a correspondence sent on November 2, 2011. However, publicly, the position of the DFAIT is clear: “We continue to engage in both cases, urging that they be resolved in a timely and transparent manner.” (Comment attributed to John Babcock of the DFAIT, published the March 10, 2012 in an article of the CBC concerning the case of Mrs. Wathelet and that of Mr. Dion). It seems that no further comment is necessary. In other cases exposed on this site, the Conservative Government has demonstrated its ability to truly help the Canadian citizens in difficulty abroad.

On the conservative side, there is also an Honorable Senator defending in principle the rights of victims. The members of the family of Mrs. Wathelet had the chance to meet him on two occasions. Following the second meeting clearly outlining the face requests in Ottawa as well as the physical evidence demonstrating the possible involvement of a third person; the family has received this from his office: “We want to make recommendations to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade on the improvements to be made to Canadians abroad in regard to the access to information available on the current Web site.”

Defending his beliefs seems to have its limits, especially when it would be to call into question those who we have put in place. This might also not be that surprising coming from a party which advocates in its election platform a discrimination of the victims of crimes by proposing specific measures for parents whose children are murdered or have disappeared. Kind of like if they were trying to determine that which limb would be the worst case when amputated. In any case it’s an amputation, does one really have to try to discriminate on the suffering and aftermath?

Ms. Wathelet was a resident of Outremont. Mr. Mulcair was already elected when she was assassinated. She has even been taken in photo with him and Jack Layton. In addition to being a citizen of his constituency, she was an elector. The office of Mr. Mulcair, as well as the other members of the NDP which have been approaches to help the family in its battle with Ottawa to receive the same treatment as other Canadians who have lived through similar situations, have remained silent. The Bloc Quebecois has at least made the effort to write a letter to the DFAIT on behalf of the family. Although this letter was very useless in its content, the form has at least had the beauty of let the illusion that the elect are in the service of the citizen.

Only, the federal Liberals have made concrete and productive efforts to help the family. Three different members have contributed to a few victory of the family. The family was of the most surprise of this observation, especially in regard of the orange wave of the NDP which has swept the Quebec in 2011.

Another surprise was the role of the federal Ombudsman for Victims of crimes. After several months, the cat is out of the bag: the board has no power; only, the capacity to make recommendations. Just as the office of Senator stated earlier, the relationship ended by a request to the members the family to make recommendations for future victims of crime. Let us recall that the family is not recognized as a victim of crime because the crime did not happened in Canada. Therefore, the CAVAC and the other organizations to help victims can only offer a minimal moral support. As demonstrated in the present, the political class doesn’t seem touched by such events even if it is documented that the rights of the family are being violated. The rule of law remains a (theoretical) foundation of democracies such as Canada or Mexico. The bureaucracy of inertia seems established well better.

Despite all the efforts and resources deployed by the family, the mobile behind the brutal murder of Mrs. Wathelet still remains unknown. It has been demonstrated that the assassin is not afflicted with mental disorders and that his crime was premeditated.

None of the mobile theorises in the wake of the events of September 17, 2009 have been validated forensically. This is not surprising in view that the true name of the assassin was included in the preliminary report of the investigation produced in the 48 hours following the assassination. The name which would have allowed to connect him to the murder of Laura Palacios in Texas using a simple Google search. The authorities and the Mexican Medias have preferred to publish the alias name used by the assassin, until the Texas case appeared in broad daylight in November 2009.

People close to the case as well as other similar cases involving Canadians to Mexico, have stated that the purpose of the Mexican authorities is to stifle the case with the aim of protecting the tourism, the main industry of the region. After this record of 3 years, it is difficult not to give a good amount of credibility to this theory.

The question of motive is essential in view of the elements present in the folder. First of all, the new elements are venus confirm that Renée Wathelet and his murderer did not maintain an intimate relationship. The assassin was in his entourage at the most through friend(e)s common. There is also an individual who had an extra marital relationship with Ms. Wathelet, relationship to which it has terminated a few days before are murder. This individual was also a beneficiary of a bank account it has opened 23 days before that fateful day. It is also on of the photographs in the presence of the assassin of Ms. Wathelet, documents that he has requested to the family of the deceased to destroy. Finally, a call has been housed in this individual since the apartment of Mrs. Wathelet, less than an hour after his death. The call to time 9 minutes 45. The authorities have confirmed to the family that no member of the judicial personnel had done any call with Ms. Wathelet’s phone. According to the investigation log, the arrested murderer was back on the scene at the time of this call. In this individual testimony to the police, he simply replied that he had no phone when asked about this call. In the days following the murder, the family of the deceased called this individual, who stayed close to the investigation, with this very number.

Three years later, important questions remain unanswered, and as long as the individuals involved will be alive, the answers will exist.

From the family: Thank you for reading this site, thank you to all those who we have supports from near or far in the course of this nightmare. Three years ago, we learned of the worst ways the worst new in our life. This year we would like to take the opportunity to pay tribute to all those who during this difficult test we tense hand. The solidarity that came from your gestures will have been of invaluable assistance and this on all fronts. We wish to thank you from the bottom our heart for helping us keep faith in the goodness of the human kind …

  • Share/Bookmark

Leave a Reply