The trial of the Brétigny rail disaster opened on Monday, April 25, before the criminal court of Évry in Essonne. On July 12, 2013, a Corail train derailed at Brétigny-sur-Orge station. The toll had been very heavy with seven dead and hundreds injured. Almost nine years after the accident, the SNCF, SNCF Réseau (formerly Réseau ferré de France) and a public company executive appear for homicides and involuntary injuries.
>> Brétigny-sur-Orge disaster: “The SNCF did everything it could to hide the truth”, says a lawyer for victims
A hundred or so people took their places on Monday, April 25, on the benches of the civil parties in the room of the Évry court which is usually used for the assizes and which has been refurbished. A second room broadcasts the debates on a screen so that everyone can find a seat. The appeal of all the civil parties took a long time. The names of the victims were mentioned one by one, starting with the seven people who died. We thus saw parade at the bar, in small tight groups, the serious faces of the relatives of these seven people who were between 19 and 82 years old.
Among the civil parties figure also traumatized and wounded. Nine years after the tragedy, these victims still live in hypervigilance, sometimes transport phobia. The civil parties hope that this trial will be able, if not to heal their wounds, to provide answers to their questions and in particular the main one: why this Corail train, which left Paris bound for Limoges, derailed and suffered a violent shock 137 km away /h, under the limit set at 150?
For the prosecution, there was a maintenance deficit, negligence in the maintenance of the tracks. Experts have pointed to a piece of metal called a fishplate, a sort of staple connecting two rails. In question, worn bolts, missing bolts, cracks on this splint. The SNCF pleads an unforeseeable defect on the metal which constitutes this part. “There are many things we want to understandexplains Maître Alexandre Varaut, lawyer for fifteen civil parties, and in particular why, when the day after the accident, the president of SNCF and Réseau ferré de France declared that it was their responsibility, that it was a maintenance problem. Now we are told that they intend to defend themselves by saying that it is not their responsibility, that there was no maintenance problem. So, what happened between the day after the accident and today when we are told of a frontal defense in such a way that there would ultimately be no one responsible? It would be bad luck.”
“Behind the expertise, there are the tears and the emotion of the victims who will be numerous every day to follow the trial.”
Maître Alexandre Varaut, civil party lawyerat franceinfo
Guillaume Pepy, ex-CEO of the SNCF, will be heard at the bar as a witness on Thursday. On the bench of the defendants, there are therefore two legal persons, the SNCF and SNCF Réseau formerly RFF, which incur a fine of 225,000 euros. And then, a natural person: a 33-year-old man, father, who, at the time of the tragedy, was proximity director of the SNCF in the Brétigny-sur-Orge sector, therefore responsible for track maintenance. He faces three years in prison and a fine of 45,000.
What is also likely to occupy the debates is the question of the SNCF’s good will to be transparent about this tragedy during the investigation. The investigating judges had enough doubts about this good will to place several executives and lawyers of the public company on wiretaps. Listenings that put clearly highlight a lack of cooperation from the SNCF. The example of a discussion where a lawyer briefs a framework, prepares it, is particularly striking. This executive is about to be heard by the investigators and the lawyer says to him: “We must let them search. We must not be proactive with these investigators”.
Challenges that Maître Emmanuel Marsigny, lawyer for the SNCF, intends to sweep away during the hearing: “There was indeed a moment the idea that perhaps, documents were not communicated, whereas it is quite the opposite. SNCF communicated thousands of documents. There was never any question of the part of the SNCF to interfere in any way whatsoever, nor to hinder the investigation. A complete examination of these wiretaps, rather than a few selected excerpts taken out of their context, will undoubtedly make it possible to litter of what is not really an accusation, but rather a pre-hearing effect.”
This trial should last six weeks in the court of Evry, the decision will be deliberated.