why is the comedian not being prosecuted for manslaughter?

The trial of comedian Pierre Palmade, tried for aggravated involuntary injuries almost 2 years after the serious road accident he caused while under the influence of drugs, opened this Wednesday morning. The artist is being prosecuted for “aggravated unintentional injuries” and not “manslaughter”as initially requested by the Prosecutor's Office. Indeed, among the victims of the accident was a 27-year-old pregnant woman who had lost the baby she was expecting as a result of the shock.

Baby declared dead before birth

After the accident, the baby was extracted urgently by cesarean section from his mother's womb, then at 6 months of pregnancy, but he was declared dead after 32 minutes of resuscitation, without having given any sign of extra-uterine life.

Thus, the investigating judge referred Pierre Palmade, at the end of May, to the Melun criminal court on the sole charge of involuntary injuries, aggravated by the use of drugs. She did not retain the qualification of involuntary homicide, which the prosecution had nevertheless requested for the loss of the fetus. This decision created debate around this thorny issue.

This choice is based on consistent case law from the Court of Cassation which has ruled on similar cases of road accidents: a child who is not born alive does not exist as a legal person. “The strict interpretation of the criminal law does not authorize the repression and therefore prosecution of acts of involuntary homicide in the case of a child who was not born alive, which is the case. in the Palmade case, estimated the investigating judge in her order for referral to the criminal court, consulted by AFP. Indeed, a medical expertise concluded that the baby carried by the pregnant passenger had died before birth and could therefore not be legally considered as a person.

Questions of bioethics and law

The case had revived the question of the legal status of the fetus. The Melun public prosecutor's office had requested a “debate” before the court on a possible charge of “manslaughter”because the baby was “indisputably viable” before the accident, according to a medical expertise carried out by the courts.

The victims also regret the choice to dismiss the comedian only for “unintentional injuries” and not for “involuntary manslaughter”. “The mother does not accept this decision. Considering that the unborn child is legally nothing and that he bears no rights is a legal aberration”regretted their lawyer, Mourad Battikh, on France Info. Me Mourad Battikh judges the case law “highly questionable”“absurd”. He intends to contest it this Wednesday.before the criminal court.

“You could be criminally prosecuted for unintentionally harming your pet or because you crushed an egg of a rare bird, but you cannot be criminally prosecuted when you unintentionally led to the death of a fetus “, denounced the lawyer. Me Mourad Battikh declared that for his client, this trial will be an opportunity “to be able to end the mourning of this lost child whom she will never meet”.

However, legislating on a probable status of the fetus in criminal law would raise serious questions of bioethics and law, particularly in matters of abortion. In certain states of the United States, for example, where the fetus can have a legal personality and therefore rights, this status leads to prohibitions and restrictions for women who must resort to abortion, even in cases of rape or serious complications during pregnancy.