eight women accuse former TV presenter of sexual violence

Eight women, including seven with their faces uncovered, say to “Release” to have suffered from Patrick Poivre d’Arvor facts that may, according to the newspaper, be qualified as rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment.

Article written by

Posted

Reading time : 1 min.

Some testify for the first time with their faces uncovered. In an article published by Release (subscribers), Monday, November 8, eight women accuse the former star presenter of TF1, Patrick Poivre d’Arvor, facts that could be qualified as “rape”, “sexual assault” or “harassment”. According to the daily, they speak “because they were shocked” by the classification without follow-up, in June, of the preliminary investigation opened following the complaint filed by the writer Florence Porcel. All are among the 22 women who have been heard by the courts in this case.

Seven of them agreed to testify publicly to the newspaper. Several, including the screenwriter and former journalist Hélène Devynck, had already expressed themselves in an investigation by World (subscribers) published in March 2021. They denounce a “domination scheme” who “mixes abuse of power and feeling of omnipotence, crushing of the weakest and complicit silence”, writing Release.

The stories of these women are marked by “recurrences and similarities”, raises the daily. These testimonialsdescribe Patrick Poivre d’Arvor as a sexual predator abusing his notoriety and using a similar modus operandi in approaching his victims and in the brutality of his acts, committed without the slightest attempt at seduction, nor the slightest consideration towards women who dared to refuse his advances “, also notes the police officer in charge of the investigation in his final report, that Release consulted.

In the case closed without follow-up by the Nanterre prosecutor’s office, eight women had filed complaints for “rape”, “sexual assault”, “attempted sexual assault” or “sexual harassment”. The rape complaint filed by Florence Porcel was dismissed due to a “insufficient evidence”, according to the parquet. Other complaints were not considered admissible by the Nanterre public prosecutor’s office because of the statute of limitations.


source site