The lawyers of Dominique Pelicot’s 50 co-defendants do not contest the materiality of the facts, all filmed by the pensioner, but are trying to position themselves differently. With more or less success.
How far can a lawyer go to defend his client accused of rape? The question has been asked since the beginning of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his 50 co-defendants, which opened on September 2 in Avignon. Around thirty lawyers represent the 51 men prosecuted, the vast majority of them, for aggravated rape committed on Gisèle Pelicot, drugged with anxiolytics by her ex-husband. And some recent outings of these black robes, outside the courtroom, have provoked very strong criticism.
William of Palma first declared that“There is rape and rape”thus displaying the line of defense of some of the accused, not without a dose of provocation. Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene also mocked on LinkedIn the support kitty of the former reality TV star Nabilla for Gisèle Pelicot, with a sexist comment: “She could have sold her plastic breasts.” Nadia El Bouroumi has once again triggered a tsunami of disapproval by filming herself on social media to recount several moments from the hearings.
These statements – perceived as clumsy or even contemptuous towards the victim – come on top of already tense hearings, where some counsel seem to be walking a tightrope and applying a sometimes fragile defence strategy.
Because of the hundreds of photos and videos kept by Dominique Pelicot, the accused cannot deny having sexual relations with the victim. Unable to contest the materiality of the facts, the majority of them base their defense on the lack of intentionality of their gesture: they maintain that they were not aware of committing a rape, say they believed in a libertine game wanted by the couple, in which Gisèle Pelicot pretended to be asleep. “I understand that it is a bit strange, but you can be dealing with a shy person.”Jacques C., 72, said during his interrogation.
A few minutes later, this attempt at justification was destroyed by the broadcast of videos concerning him, in a terrified courtroom. The victim, visibly inert, snores loudly. Louis-Alain Lemaire, Jacques C.’s lawyer, flew into a rage after the broadcast of these abject scenes, denouncing their appearance “sensational”. Aware, no doubt, of their catastrophic effect on his defense. Because if the argument of a libertine game can work before the arrival of the accused on the scene, how can one claim, once in the room, not to have grasped the problem?
How can we explain that every man invited by Dominique Pelicot ignored the consent of this woman lying on the bed? Few of them tried to justify themselves on this point. “I was a little slow on the uptake”dared Jacques C. And added: “There are different levels of falling asleep.” “I was naive, stupid, a fool, an ass”listed Cyrille D., 54, apologizing profusely to Gisèle Pelicot, visibly tired of multiple attempts at contrition in which she does not seem to believe.
The stories of the accused are piling up and are similar, as investigator Stéphan Gal recounted in court. Almost all of them came at night, undressed in the living room or kitchen, entered the bedroom on tiptoe and whispered on the videos, taking care not to wake the victim. The defense is particularly afraid of this globalizing effect, hoping that each person will be judged individually.
“We cannot condemn someone who has no criminal record in the same way as someone who has a record, someone who has been there once, and someone who has been there several times: that is the titanic work of the court.”
Olivier Lantelme, lawyer for one of the accusedto franceinfo
In addition to the repetition of the facts, the lawyers of the 50 co-accused must deal with a formidable adversary: Dominique Pelicot. Sitting in his box, microphone in hand, he puts his co-accused down at every opportunity, either at the end of their interrogations, when the time comes to hear the version of the chief instigator. Invariably, the 71-year-old man assures that these men, contacted online, all knew that they were coming to have sex with a sleeping woman.
From September 17, the day of his interrogation, the septuagenarian had set the tone: “I am a rapist like those in this room. (…) IThey all knew, they can’t say otherwise.” So, when Lionel R., 44, repeated that he had not raped Gisèle Pélicot in any way “voluntary”Dominique Pelicot took care to contradict several of his statements. “I told him I drugged my wife at breakfast.”he assured, specifying that he had crushed Temesta tablets in his coffee, Lionel R. being one of the rare accused to have gone to the Pelicots’ house in broad daylight. “He even asked me how it was going, he was careful not to say.”he added, in a monotone, but still very assured tone.
Faced with these attacks by the main accused, the defense therefore strives to demonstrate that most of their clients found themselves under the thumb of a man “impressive” And “authoritarian”. It is probably on this ground that she can hope to score the most points. The psychiatric experts themselves have presented Dominique Pelicot as a “manipulator”with a personality “perverse”. The couple’s friends also noted that his authoritarian temperament had become stronger when they moved to Mazan, in Vaucluse, in 2011. That is, when Dominique Pelicot began inviting men to rape his wife. According to the defense, almost all of them were duped by the former real estate agent and then remained, as if paralysed by fear, in the marital bedroom.
In addition to this difficult position to assume, there were moments in the hearing that were perceived as particularly violent for the victim. Like the day of Wednesday, September 18. That day, two lawyers, Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene and Philippe Kaboré, requested that twenty-seven intimate photos of Gisèle Pelicot be viewed. A “big reveal” tinged with humiliation in the eyes of the septuagenarian, angrier than ever at the bar. In these photos, the septuagenarian appears naked, in very suggestive scenes.
For Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene, it was essentially a question of proving that, if these images had been sent to certain accused (which Dominique Pelicot refutes), they could suggest that Gisèle Pelicot had consented to a swingers meeting. “The defense, like the prosecution, has the right to invoke evidence that is unfavorable to one of the parties. Afterwards, you have to know how to question Mrs. Pelicot.”believes Patrick Gontard, who represents one of the accused.
“We can say anything, but we must know how to say it, with the dignity that befits these debates.”
Patrick Gontard, lawyer for one of the accusedto franceinfo
Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene assures that she has taken the necessary precautions. “I was very careful in the words I used, to explain why I requested the screening. I tried not to use double meanings or accusatory words.”she reports to franceinfo. Others did not have these scruples. “You wouldn’t have exhibitionist tendencies that you wouldn’t assume?” his colleague Philippe Kaboré said. And when Gisèle Pelicot got angry, calling the question “very insulting”it was Nadia El Bouroumi who added. “You are angry, but you are also responsible for this broadcast!” the lawyer shouted at her, referring to the fact that the septuagenarian had opposed the closed hearing.
This widely circulated sequence was strongly criticized in terms of both form and substance. “In all rape trials, when the defense lawyer stands up to question the complainant, it is necessarily experienced as disturbing, intrusive.”analyzes Olivier Lantelme, lawyer of one of the accused. “We have the impression that it is not accepted that we can express the slightest suspicion about elements of the file”believes Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene.
“It’s unbearable, I feel like I’m reliving the Outreau trial, but worse, where popular anger pointed the finger at the guilty parties from the start of the trial.”
Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene, lawyer for one of the accusedto franceinfo
On the defense benches, the very image of the victim seems cumbersome. “Gisèle Pelicot has become an icon today, she is favored by the press, she is glorified. It is therefore very difficult to unseat her or to attack her.”considers Patrick Gontard. “In a decade, the criminal trial has evolved: we now have the impression that it is absolutely necessary to protect victims, even at the cost of the unreasonable”adds Olivier Lantelme. Positions which explain the barrage of questions addressed to Gisèle Pelicot at the Avignon court. She herself summed up the effect produced by the defense strategy in this way. “I feel like the culprit is me, and behind me, the 50 [co-accusés] are victims”she was indignant, widely supported, especially on social networks.
The repercussions of the dissemination of the images prompted defense lawyers to plead on Friday for it to no longer be systematic. And above all, for the media to no longer be able to see them. Which the president, Roger Arata, granted. “There is no point in the debate by projecting this for the whole world to see.”believes Olivier Lantelme, welcoming this decision. According to him, Gisèle Pelicot “cannot have the keys to dignity, including her own dignity: it is not because she says ‘it doesn’t bother me’ that the president must acquiesce”the lawyer decides. The victim will therefore continue to watch the horror of the abuse inflicted on her, but no journalist will be able to report on it. An advantage for the defense.