In a Montreal courtroom, the lawyer representing Paméla Groleau claimed that she did not defame Cardinal Marc Ouellet through her accusations of sexual misconduct. He stated that Groleau first brought her claims to light anonymously in 2008 to a church advisory committee and later included Ouellet in a 2022 class-action lawsuit concerning similar allegations against clergy members of the Quebec City diocese.

Groleau's lawyer emphasized that Groleau's allegations, which involve inappropriate touching by Ouellet between 2008 and 2010 when she was working for the Catholic Church, are based on her experiences and thus cannot be classified as defamatory. The lawyer argued that her intention was not to damage Ouellet’s reputation by making these accusations, and any media coverage that ensued was not a direct consequence of her actions.

The case exemplifies the ongoing struggle surrounding allegations of sexual misconduct within religious institutions, highlighting the complexities in legal definitions of defamation. The outcome of Ouellet's $100,000 defamation lawsuit could have significant implications for both Groleau and the ongoing discourse around accountability in cases of clergy misconduct.