The couple was judged on Wednesday for having broadcast, in 2020, intimate videos of the one who was, at the material time, deputy and candidate for mayor of Paris.
“Those who want to laugh leave the room”, tries to reframe the president. Between the scandals and the recitations of Molière, the criminal trial of the couple Piotr Pavlenski and Alexandra de Taddeo before the 17th chamber of the Paris court took a funny turn, Wednesday June 28.
Almost three and a half years after the broadcast, on February 12, 2020, of intimate videos of Benjamin Griveaux on the site Pornopolitique, which had led him to abandon the race for mayor of Paris, then to withdraw from political life by resigning from his mandate as deputy, the public prosecutor requested, at the end of a hectic day of hearings, six months’ imprisonment for Piotr Pavlenski and six months’ suspended imprisonment for Alexandra de Taddeo.
The tone of the day was set as soon as the hearing opened. The two defendants, who are appearing for invasion of privacy “by capture, recording or transmission without the consent of the person of images of a sexual nature” which have been “brought to the attention of the public” are missing. “Stuck in traffic jams”, according to their lawyers. After an hour of waiting, the couple finally arrives, not without taking the time to pause in front of the press. One is dressed in black, shaved head, the other is dressed in bluish sequins, in a striking contrast.
Right to silence and self-promotion
From the first minutes of the hearing, the 39-year-old Russian artist launched, despite the reprimands of the court, into a monologue, castigating “the sneaky conservatives” at the beginning of “the ban” from his site. These declarations then cause the first of a long series of hearing suspensions. Annoyed at having been interrupted, Piotr Pavlenski then asserted his right to silence.
Alexandra de Taddeo, meanwhile, is particularly talkative. “I’m here to talk about my book and great feelings, love”, she summarizes in front of the press. In her hands, when she takes the stand, the book in question, Love (ed. Private). “The story of my life is a series of contradictions, she says. It must have been the original title.” Throughout her speech, the 32-year-old young woman constantly refers to her work, the audience clearly becoming an opportunity to promote it. Regarding her involvement in the dissemination of intimate videos of Benjamin Griveaux, she defend not having “at no time wanted to trap” the former deputy, and having kept certain videos “to protect himself”. Alexandra de Taddeo ensures that she was not aware of the project of her spouse.
The young woman recognizes it without difficulty: before her meeting with Piotr Pavlenski, “art was not something very important” in his life. “I had come to his conference to seduce someone in my class”she laughs, before venturing into a sociological explanation: “I don’t come from an artistic background at all, but from a conservative background.” Since then, the one who was, for a time, a student in political science and law at the Parisian University of Assas has abandoned her course to devote herself to the history of art. In his eyes, Piotr Pavlenski is moreover “the greatest contemporary artist of our time”.
“This is a trial, not a show”
Installed on their bench, the two defendants multiply the knowing smiles and the invectives. Asked about her political position, Alexendra de Taddeo claims to be “evolving feminist”. “The first of the rules of feminism is respect for consent”, retorts Marine Viegas, one of Benjamin Griveaux’s lawyers, during her argument.
Piotr Pavlenski for his part defends the dissemination of intimate videos by evoking an artistic approach within the framework of his work. Throughout the afternoon, witnesses are called by the defendants to reinforce this line of defence. The name of the actress Béatrice Dalle even appears in the list. And then… nothing. Instead of answers, here they are reciting one after the other whole tirades from the Tartuffe by Moliere. “It is undoubtedly, madam, an extreme sweetness. To hear these words from a mouth that one loves”, declaims one of the three actors who came to testify.
These feverish recitations, punctuated by applause, cause a new suspension of hearing. The court is exasperated. Some disruptive elements get out of the room. The couple chuckles and then applauds. “This is a trial, not a show,” recalls the president, overwhelmed despite all the calls to order. “We even had the right to an actor who does not know his text”, slips into his pleading Richard Malka, another counsel for Benjamin Griveaux, ironically on the fact that “art deserves a little better than that”.
After a goofy and rambling hearing, he ends up calling for “take height”. According to him, the couple tried during this day of trial “to delegitimize the judicial power, after having wanted to delegitimize the political power”. “You really are a big fool”, replies Piotr Pavlenski, in a last outing show. Ihe court’s decision on the penalties incurred by the couple has been reserved. It will be returned on October 11.