At the Vaucluse criminal court,
At the bar of the Vaucluse criminal court, the psychiatrist invariably repeats his analysis: none of the seven men he assessed can be considered a “sexual abuser”. Dr Philippe Darbourg also did not observe any “psychopathological disorders” or “deviant sexual tendencies” among them.
Of course, this 75-year-old doctor, with a fifty-year career, is not unaware that all of them were filmed while they had sexual relations with Gisèle Pelicot while she was sedated without her knowledge. One of them told him that he had gone to Mazan six times and considered reproducing the facts about his mother. During the hearing this Wednesday, the doctor learned that two other men were being prosecuted for possession of child abuse images. Elements which, however, are not likely to change his analysis. “There is a contrast between your position and the image of the penis in the mouth of the unconscious Ms. Pelicot,” reprimands Me Stéphane Babonneau, who defends the victim.
“Positive prognosis elements”
How can we explain such conclusions with regard to the profile or positioning of certain accused? Let's take Nicolas F. This 42-year-old journalist went to the Pelicots in 2018. At the helm, this dark-skinned Avignon resident, square glasses placed on his nose, bald, explained that he was looking to have new “experiences” after a breakup. The expert did not note any “oddities” or “dangerousness”. “There is no proven psychological imbalance, any disorders… These are elements of a positive prognosis,” he emphasizes, his hands resting on the desk, his back slightly arched.
What about the pedocriminal, zoophilic or sadomasochistic images found on the accused's computer (which he denies having downloaded)? “Could this change your observations? », asks the president of the court, Roger Arata. “This confirms the notion of uncertain sexuality with somewhat unhealthy exploratory behavior,” replies the expert but maintains that he does not see clinical signs suggesting that the man would be a “sexual abuser”. “In an expertise of this nature, our role is to specify a risk of recurrence. So here, in a way, to differentiate between a sexual abuser by circumstance and habit,” insists Dr. Darbourg.
“Six times isn’t that recurring?” »
But where do the circumstances end for entering into the habit? Charly A. is the youngest accused of the week. The first time this small forklift operator – brown crew-cut hair, mustache and thin beard collar – went to the Pelicots' house, it was in 2016. He was 21 years old at the time. He returned five times until June 2020. “Six times, isn’t that recurring? », asks Me Babonneau. “Six times with the same person, in very specific conditions,” the expert evacuates, as if this attenuates the aspect of seriality. “He is not someone who seems to me to systematically seek out situations of sexual assault,” he continues.
Pressed by Gisèle Pelicot's lawyer, Dr Darbourg recognizes that it would perhaps have been better to use the term “predator” rather than “abuser” but does not return to his analysis which gives the feeling of being very dated. “Isn’t this the definition of an abuser that deserves to be reviewed in 2024? », Supports Me Babonneau. The expert persists, firmly asserting that even a conviction would not make him burden himself with an opinion on the notion of “abuser”.
After hearing it for almost two hours, it's impossible to get rid of this question: how would the case have evolved without these damning videos? In classic sexual violence cases, we often witness “word against word”. However, with such an analysis, would the victim's words have had the same weight?
