At the Vaucluse criminal court,
Dominique Pelicot, on one side. All the other defendants, on the other. This could summarize the verdict rendered this Thursday by the Vaucluse criminal court. Certainly, the magistrates considered that all these men were guilty: two of “aggravated sexual assault”, two others of “attempted aggravated rape” and the last 47 of “aggravated rape”. But they seemed to make a much clearer distinction than during the requisitions between Dominique Pelicot – the “conductor” – and the men he invited to his home to rape his wife, Gisèle, who was drugged without his knowledge.
Unsurprisingly, the septuagenarian was sentenced to the maximum sentence: twenty years of criminal imprisonment, accompanied by a two-thirds security sentence, a period during which he cannot request parole. “At the end of your sentence, your file will be re-examined with a view to possible security detention,” added the president. Hearing these words, the one who had until then remained quite phlegmatic seemed to flinch. “He is a little dazed by this security period,” said his lawyer, Ms. Béatrice Zavarro, at the end of the hearing, specifying that she was considering the possibility of appealing.
“The court condemned the conductor”
And for good reason. This additional sentence, very rarely awarded, means that at the end of his sentence, Dominique Pelicot could be placed in a medical-judicial center. And therefore never regain his freedom. This system, created in 2008, only applies to criminals whose dangerousness is considered very high. Before the end of his sentence, “the ogre of Mazan” will therefore appear before a multidisciplinary commission which will decide whether such placement is necessary. “The court condemned the conductor by making a difference between him and the musicians who make up this orchestra,” said his counsel.
Because if the magistrates went beyond the requisitions of the prosecution for Dominique Pelicot, they fell far short for his fifty co-defendants. The attorneys general had requested sentences ranging from ten to eighteen years’ imprisonment for the men accused of raping Gisèle Pelicot. Those pronounced this Thursday range from two years firm to fifteen years. While the president lists the sentences, the victim’s children struggle to hide their annoyance. Outside, the feminists demonstrating are outraged. “Accomplice justice”, “shame on justice”, “call from the prosecution”… they chant in chorus.
Reasons for the verdict
Certainly, only nine defendants left the court free, three of whom are under a deferred committal warrant and should soon return to prison. But these sentences are, for the majority, lower than those handed down in France. According to the latest figures from the Ministry of Justice, sentences for rape are generally eleven years. The criminal court has not yet issued its “motivations”, that is to say the detailed explanation of the verdict, sentence by sentence. It is therefore impossible to know what arguments weighed with the magistrates.
Why, for example, was Jacques C. found guilty of rape sentenced to two years? Certainly, he is the oldest of the accused but the facts incriminating him are not very different from those which have sometimes earned sentences three times heavier for others. Why do some men who have come to Mazan twice have the same penalties as others who have only been there once?
“It’s a snub to the victims”
“How can you be found guilty of rape and be sentenced to two, three, four years in prison? », asks Sylvia, one of the feminist demonstrators, met in front of the courthouse. And to insist: “For me, it’s a snub to the victims. » Other activists see in this verdict a message of impunity for perpetrators of sexual violence. Some sentences shock them more than others. Jean-Pierre M., the disciple of Dominique Pelicot, who drugged and raped his wife with the latter, was sentenced to twelve years in prison. The attorneys general demanded five more years. “Why didn’t he have the same pain as Dominique Pelicot? He chemically subjected his wife to rape her and have her raped,” insists Jeanne, in her twenties.
Arguments swept aside by the defense lawyers. “These are sentences consistent with ordinary case law, that which we see on a daily basis,” insists Me Paul Roger Gontard. His colleague, Me Louis-Alain Lemaire, says nothing else. “The requisitions were ax. The court did a real job of individualization,” he believes.
Now there remains the question of a possible appeal. For lawyers and their clients, it is time for reflection and, above all, calculations. Between the pre-trial detention already carried out – often twenty months – and the sentence reduction games, the men sentenced to sentences of six, seven, eight years in prison could request a conditional release within a few months, or two years maximum. . “I tell myself that one is better than two if you get it,” continues Me Lemaire. If we appeal we will go before a criminal court with jurors. I distrust the vox populi. » Two of them, however, already seem to have decided to go.
