The lawyers for the civil parties completed their pleadings this Tuesday, May 7, and pointed out the refusal of the defendants to assume any responsibility in the fatal accident that occurred in 2015.
The lawyers for some 90 civil parties in the trial of the TGV Est accident which led to the death of 11 people and left 42 injured, concluded their pleadings on Tuesday May 7 by expressing their frustration at the refusal of the defendants to assume any responsibility , reports AFP.
“Was it really impossible for the defendants to simply say sorry?” asked Maître Sophie Sarre, lawyer for the family of Fanny Mary, 25, the youngest victim of the derailment which occurred in Alsace on November 14, 2015.
Maître Gérard Chemla, who defends around fifty civil parties, castigated “the evasions” of the defendants.
“My clients hoped that the truth would be written in black and white,” the lawyer said, but as the end of the trial approaches, all the civil parties agree that they have not received answers to their questions about the responsibility of each party in the accident.
Three companies prosecuted
The lawyer denounced “the lightning rod technique” used by the defendants to shift responsibility for faults onto others.
“There is an age in life when we take responsibility for the things we have done,” urged the lawyer. “Why lie?” he asked the defendants. “It is time to rise to the height of the drama in which you are involved. It is a question of human respect”, he continued before launching: “There is still time to do it”.
The trial, which opened on March 4 before the Paris criminal court, must end next week, after a long break due to the public holidays of May 8 and 9, without the defendants, three individuals and three companies including SNCF, all prosecuted for “homicides and involuntary injuries due to clumsiness, imprudence, negligence or failure to fulfill a safety obligation”, have admitted the slightest fault.
The investigation established that neither the equipment nor the track could be blamed to explain the derailment of the TGV, which was transporting 53 people, including 35 “guests”. Excessive speed and late braking were the causes of the accident.
The TGV, which was carrying out tests on the final portion of the high-speed line between Paris and Strasbourg before opening to the public, approached a curve at 265 km/h, well above the 176 km/h planned for this place. It derailed 200 meters further, hitting the parapet of the bridge above the Marne-Rhine canal near Eckwersheim (Bas-Rhin), 20 km from Strasbourg, at an estimated speed of 243 km/h .
“Forever bereaved”
“Security has been left in limbo,” lamented Master Claude Lienhard, another civil party lawyer, pointing out “the evasive responses” of the defendants since the start of the trial. “The various actors are locked in denial,” he lamented. In the dock, the six men incriminated have their heads lowered.
“If a TGV does not derail and this TGV has derailed, it is because the risk assessment was poorly done,” underlined Maître Sarre.
The driver of the train, the manager responsible for giving him the braking and acceleration instructions and the technician from Systra – the company managing the tests – responsible for informing the driver about the particularities of the track “collectively took bad decisions,” continued the lawyer for Fanny Mary’s family at the bar. “The legal entities (SNCF, SNCF-Réseau and Systra, Editor’s note) poorly controlled and poorly analyzed the tests,” she said.
“The civil parties want a clear conviction of all the defendants… for the rest, they know that they will remain forever in mourning,” Me Sarre explained to the court.
The requisitions of the public prosecutor, Nicolas Hennebelle, are expected on Monday. They should last “between four and five hours”.
The magistrate should focus on the way in which the risks were assessed by the various protagonists, on the training of each, the operating teams and technical managers and on the shortcomings noted in the organization of the tests.
The defense will have the opportunity to speak on Tuesday and Thursday – there is no hearing on Wednesday – before the 31st chamber of the Paris court announces the date of the deliberation.
