“He is a victim of his…”

Was justice too severe with Pierre Palmade, deciding this Monday, February 12, 2023 to place him in pre-trial detention with a warrant of committal? For Charles Consigny, former columnist for Laurent Ruquier, now a lawyer and member of the Grandes Gueules, on RMCthere is no doubt.

The notoriety of Pierre Palmade would harm him according to the lawyer

On the morning show, he felt that “in that case”the 54-year-old comedian was “more a victim of his notoriety than he benefits from it since if he was an ordinary citizen in quotation marks, there would have been no such investigation, there would have been no electronic bracelet, and the there would be no question of incarcerating him”.

Regarding the affair which began on February 10, with a violent car accident, under the influence of narcotics, Charles Consigny explained that if Pierre Palmade was not as well known: “He would not even have been brought to an immediate appearance, because we would have liked to wait to find out what would have happened to the status of this fetus who died in the accident”. And the specialist in the right to add that the humorist “would have appeared later, quietly awaiting his hearing at his home”.

>> To see also: “16 years of love”: Laure Manaudou is in mourning, her vibrant tribute to her most faithful friend who has now passed away

And this media exposure of the Pierre Palmade affair would carry “harm“to the star in many ways, judge Charles Consigny. The man who had campaigned in 2022 for Valérie Pécresse indeed mentioned the case of possession of child pornography images which was added to that of the car accident.

And on the aspect of possession of child pornography images?

Regarding the serious charges that have yet to be proven, and which are still under investigation, Charles Consigny revealed: “It’s another file, it can affect the judge’s decision. It shouldn’t because in my opinion it was not put in the debates when there was the hearing before the Court of appeal. But that can unfortunately weigh” and “it would not be very compliant with the law”.

FA


source site-8