“I was his son-in-law, this man no longer exists for me.” The words are blurted out in one breath. In the wake of his wife Caroline Darian, Pierre P. came to deliver his testimony before the Vaucluse criminal court, Tuesday October 8. The 52-year-old man crosses the courtroom to the lectern and does not glance at his father-in-law, Dominique Pelicot, who is watching him attentively from his box.
However, he and the main defendant in the trial have long been very close. “I arrived in this family in November 2003, more than twenty years ago. I loved this man, we had common passions, notably sport. We spent a lot of time together when I went to see them,” Pierre P. in a calm voice, dressed in a gray suit. But since Gisèle and Dominique Pelicot moved to Mazan in 2011, where the couple had settled for retirement, the latter “came gradually less and less” in the Paris region.
“When my mother-in-law returned to Vaucluse, we had a lot of trouble reaching her. He was the one who answered the phone,” remembers Pierre P., recounting the painful descent into hell of the septuagenarian, who lost radically weight, plagued by repeated absences. “When she finally answered the phone, she said she was sleeping, even in broad daylight, because she was very tired,” he continues, regretting having believed “to the perverse thesis” from his father-in-law, who explained that his wife was exhausted because she was taking care of her grandchildren too much.
To illustrate the state of his mother-in-law, he recounts a telephone conversation from January 2020. It is her son, then aged 6, who calls Gisèle Pelicot on the phone. She said to him: “You’re going to find mom in her bed, give her little kisses.” The little one answers: “Well no, mom, I found her yesterday.” A few seconds later, the retiree repeats: “You’re going to find mom, you’re going to give her little kisses on her neck.” The little boy hangs up, taken aback.
“I understand now that his only objective was to keep her under his yoke”points out Pierre P. He describes the day of November 2, 2020, when they learned the unthinkable – “the tipping point”said Caroline Darian in his place a few weeks earlier. He is the first to know: it is Gisèle Pelicot who tells him. “The sky is falling on your head.” He rushes to the physiotherapist, with whom he had an appointment. “I was late: I collapsed on the ground”, he says without lingering. “Since then, I’ve gotten back up.”
In the evening, Pierre P. told his wife the terrible news. “The cry turned into anger that consumed her,” especially after the discovery of two naked photos of her on her father’s hard drive. Caroline Darian founded the association M’dors pas: stop chemical submission to help victims. “She threw herself headlong into the battle against chemical submission, in an incredibly courageous wayobserves her husband. But it’s constantly up and down.”
He explains to his son that he will no longer be able to see his grandfather, whom he adored. Both played regularly, the child being for PSG, his grandpa for OM. In his box, Dominique Pelicot hides his eyes. “I tell my son: ‘We can go see a nice doctor’continues Pierre P. At first he says no, that he doesn’t need it. Then three weeks later, he said to his mother: ‘Actually, yes, I need it’.” The little boy saw a psychologist for two years.
Before coming to give evidence in court, Pierre says he asked his son, who is now 10 years old, if he wanted anything to be said to his grandfather. The little boy thought about it: he seemed to want to send him a message. His father spoke to him about it again some time later. “I changed my mind”, said the child. “For what ?”, asks Pierre P. “Because I have nothing more to say to him.” retorts the little boy. “His grandson has nothing more to say to him”repeats his father at the bar.
Antoine Camus, Gisèle Pelicot’s lawyer, asks him why he has not filed a civil suit. “I went through some ordeals: my mother’s suicide. Then I lost my father in almost equally monstrous circumstances”he explains. “These ordeals allowed me to develop self-defense that was extremely useful when I learned the facts. So I protected myself very hard.”
Nadia El Bouroumi, defense lawyer, relays the words of several accused. “They ask, ‘How could she not have noticed?'” She continues: “We heard that the family was worried, appointments had been made, and with a simple blood test, we would have determined the presence of Temesta, Zolpidem,…”
“You are forgetting something: we cannot imagine the unimaginable.”
Pierre P., type of Gisèle and Dominique Pelicotbefore the criminal court
The lawyer continues and returns to the subject of her non-constitution as a civil party, ensuring that it was she who communicated the information to her colleague, Antoine Camus, “so that he asks you the question.” “You’re losing your mind, sister!” blurted out Gisèle Pelicot’s lawyer, visibly taken aback.
But the person concerned continues and sharply raises her voice, as usual. She violently attacks Pierre P., accusing him of the bias of BFMTV, the news channel for which he works, as editor-in-chief for the morning show. She accuses him “to maintain the media court” against the defense. “You allow yourself to communicate a lot about this trial, because you are the husband of Caroline Darian!” believes Nadia El Bouroumi, accusing him of having opposed the closed session for the broadcast of the videos of the accused. “Aren’t we victims of your confusing position?”she asks.
The hearing takes another turn. The room tenses. Pierre P., surprisingly calm, delivers a long explanation and assures that the management of BFMTV is aware of his links with the affair, that he works with “n+1, n+2, n+4”that he is far from being the only one to make decisions. “There is the individual journalist, like the individual lawyer. Sometimes I am totally disgusted by your line of defense as an individual. But the journalist understands it and respects it and the defense lawyers have always had a voice in the chapter on the channel”he believes.
But the lawyer returns to the charge. “All the information on your channel since this month has been oriented towards the fact that our clients are monsters, that lawyers are monsters, and the presumption of innocence does not exist!”she screams. The general advocate intervenes, very annoyed, considering “let us move away from the debate”. “This trial poses a real problem in terms of communication!” continues the lawyer. “You are putting the press on trial!” Antoine Camus is indignant in turn. “The press is used by the civil party!”retorts Nadia El Bouroumi.
The president tries to regain control, with difficulty, calling on him to “refocus your questions on the themes that interest the case”. The lawyer continues her diatribe about the media then ends, after long tense minutes, by returning to questions related to the case.
After questions from the defense, Dominique Pelicot asks to speak, to speak to his son-in-law. He gets down from his usual chair, overhanging, to sit at the bottom of the box. “To me, you were like a son”, he says while crying. “No one is responsible in the family, try to let go of that, I am the only one responsible.”assures the septuagenarian. Pierre P. looks at him, then ends up turning away. He drinks a large glass of water at the end of the statement from Dominique Pelicot, with whom he had not had contact since 2020.