It is a categorical refusal which risks bogging down the debate even further during the next hearings of the
trial of the Mazan rapes. For more than two months, 51 men have been on trial for rapes committed on Gisèle Pelicot. An extraordinary case playing out before the Vaucluse criminal court.
On Wednesday November 13, 2024, Dr Philippe Darbourg, expert psychiatrist, delivered analyzes arousing as much perplexity as controversy. Its conclusions on the last seven defendants, tried this week, also relaunched debates on their profile and the risk of recidivism.
The expert's refusal under fire from critics
Dr. Philippe Darbourg, a 75-year-old experienced psychiatrist, affirmed that the seven men examined did not present either “ psychopathological disorders ” is ” deviant sexual tendencies “. He insisted: none can be qualified as “ sexual abuser “. However, their actions, filmed without their knowledge, demonstrate sexual relations with an unconscious victim. Two of them are being prosecuted for possession of child pornography images. Contradictions fueling tensions, in particular with the victim's lawyer, Me Stéphane Babonneau, who questioned the expert on the limits of his conclusions.
Disturbing elements but unchanged analysis
Among the accusedNicolas F., 42-year-old former journalist. During the hearing, Dr Darbourg discovered that the latter had more than 200 paedocriminal, zoophilic or sadomasochistic videos on his computer. Images that he also denies having downloaded. However, despite the seriousness of these elements, the retired doctor maintains his analysis. “There is a contrast between your position and the image of the penis in the mouth of the unconscious Ms. Pelicot,” underlined Me Stéphane Babonneau, lawyer for the victim. “This confirms the notion of uncertain sexuality with somewhat unhealthy exploratory behavior” he admitted.
Serious acts but “positive” profiles
Charly A., 30 years old, young forklift driver, also illustrates this discrepancy. In 2016, when he came to the Pelicots for the first time, he was only 21 years old. He will return to the couple six times, until 2020. According to the expert, he is a man who acted in “special circumstances”. Despite these disturbing elements, the expert persists in believing that he also does not correspond to the profile of a serial rapist.
A definition to rethink in the face of expert refusal
This hearing thus called into question the very definition of a “sexual abuser”. Dr Darbourg reiterated his refusal. According to him, no clinical signs indicated that these men were among them. He underlined the importance of his role as an expert. “Specify a risk of recurrence and differentiate between a circumstantial and habitual sexual abuser” he noted. This distinction, although essential, has sparked strong criticism from the civil party, who sees it as a minimization of the facts. Indeed, Gisèle Pelicot's lawyer insisted on the repetition of the facts and their seriousness. “ Isn’t that the definition of an abuser that needs to be revisited? » he pleaded.
Manipulation in the background
Another point raised at the trial concerns the influence of Dominique Pelicot. Dr. François Amic, who examined ten defendants earlier in the case, believed that these men could have been manipulated. “In my opinion, there was a lie: Mr. Pelicot did not tell anyone that his wife was drugged” he said. Suggesting, in passing, that many of the accused were in “a second state”
facing the situation. A contested hypothesis shedding a different light on the behavior of those involved. Indeed, the latter were described as “fascinated” and without real awareness of the seriousness of the acts committed.
