Ilistens, follows the debates, but no words come out of his mouth. Arnaud Dufour is a silent accused. He has been on trial since Tuesday, November 12, before the Dordogne Assize Court, and has chosen to maintain total silence. A position that he adopted in June 2021, when he was accused of the murder of Jean-Yves Di Pasquale. And on Wednesday, on the second day of his trial at the Périgueux courthouse, he still said nothing. However, he faces thirty years in prison.
On April 12, 2021, the body of Jean-Yves Di Pasquale was discovered in his apartment at 24, cours Tourny in Périgueux. The cause of death emerges from the autopsy: it was a blow with an object, possibly a hammer, which led to a brain hemorrhage. The judicial police therefore imagine someone having hit this 54-year-old man placed under guardianship. But who?
Seen at the victim’s house
Investigations then quickly showed that the fifty-year-old, who passed the time by helping at the Périgueux cathedral, had a habit of welcoming people in precarious situations into his home. Three men are identified. Among them, the accused. He was seen, several days before the discovery of the body, smoking cigarettes at Jean-Yves Di Pasquale’s window. Moreover, the judicial police found cigarette butts bearing Arnaud Dufour’s DNA at the foot of the building. And surveillance cameras prove that he left Périgueux on April 12 by train, at a time concomitant with the death of the victim.
The investigation takes a decisive turn when a hammer is discovered in a garbage container on Cours Tourny. Arnaud Dufour’s DNA is found on the tool. It is the same one that is identified in the palm of Jean-Yves Di Pasquale’s hand.
Before the court, Me Pohu-Panier, defense lawyer, objects: “We are not sure when my client was there. He did not have the key to the accommodation. The victim’s DNA was not on the hammer. He [l’accusé] did not confess. We have nothing! »
“The anxiety of being sent back to the street” could explain the fatal gesture
It remains to be seen why Arnaud Dufour (who benefits from the presumption of innocence) would have killed Jean-Yves Di Pasquale. Two scenarios are outlined. The first is that of revenge: the victim had told her former tenant that she wanted him to leave. According to a psychologist, “the anxiety of being sent back to the street” could explain the homeless man’s fatal action. The latter, during one of his rare speeches in the procedure, denied: he left because he was tired, he assured, of protecting Jean-Yves Di Pasquale from people who were looking to stay with him .
The other scenario is based on the fact that the victim had assumed, for several years, her preference for men. Would the fifty-year-old have made advances towards Arnaud Dufour? Dr. Bertrand, expert psychiatrist, puts forward this hypothesis: “Paranoids [NDLR : c’est le cas de l’accusé] have a repressed homosexual problem according to psychoanalysts. But they are psychorigid. So it’s dangerous for a homosexual to make advances towards a paranoid person. »
But by remaining silent, Arnaud Dufour does not allow us to conclude on this point. “I’m a stranger to all this, so I prefer to keep silent,” he mutters.
The verdict is expected this Thursday, November 14 in the afternoon.
