The 3rd day of the hearing of the Aude Assize Court shed light on the personality of the victim, Franck Tamba, whose body was found in the port of Gruissan on July 5, 2018. His two children spoke of their pain before their lawyer’s plea. Patrick Gérard, accused of voluntary homicide, has still not given an explanation of how the tragedy unfolded.
Who was Franck Tamba, found dead in the water of the port of Gruissan on the morning of July 5? Because if since the beginning of these meetings, we have scrutinized the past and the personality of Patrick Gérard the accused, few elements have come to shed light on that of the victim.
Children’s pain at the bar
On the stand, Franck Tamba’s children put words to the suffering of this father who died too soon. His son, aged 35, a computer developer in Toulouse, drew the personality of this father devoted to his family, an outstanding musician, with whom he shared intense moments: “I was lulled by the blues of his guitar. He was a funny guy!” He recongnizes : “He had impulsive behavior at times, he could be heavy when he had drunk, but for me he didn’t have a drinking problem.” The son continues: “I loved him. His loss traumatized me. We never get over it. I expect from justice a decision commensurate with the crime committed, the suffering inflicted”. Under the questions put by Maître Martin Vatinel of the Toulouse bar, the lawyer for the civil parties, emerge the contours of a divorced father who had left Toulouse to settle in Gruissan as a traveling salesman after a stormy separation. He left behind two children with whom he had a good relationship. Nicknamed Franky, he is described as kind, helpful and generous, and even lent money to a friend so she could buy a car without requiring repayment. He had inherited guardianship of his disabled brother upon the death of his parents.
Her daughter, in a voice broken with sobs, recalls this father whom she joined for the holidays in Gruissan, very close by, who often called her to find out her grades and follow up on her studies. She recalls those moments when she accompanied him to the markets, and he accosted the customers gathered around the stand. “On the market he was appreciated, he said hello to everyone.” Too moved to continue, she is encouraged by Maître Vatinel who says to her: “It took 6 years for you to express yourself, take your time, we can wait… Then she expresses her resentment and we feel anger, mixed with immense pain: “My brother called me to tell me that dad had died. We didn’t know anything; just that we had found him in the port. We were not accompanied, not supported. The gendarmes kept us informed out of kindness. It was complicated with the mourning…”
An outburst of violence
“Alas underlined President Sylvie Gossent, the truth has still not emerged, even after 3 days of debate!” as the accused continued to hide behind his blackout, showing himself incapable of explaining the unfolding of the drama. But for Maître Vatinel, the lawyer for the civil parties, the intentional element does indeed exist, in what he calls an outbreak of violence. : “That evening the dikes exploded: alcohol does not make you violent, you have to have a background of violence to lead to such an outburst of violence. Everything says it: broken glasses, bloodstains staining the boat, lethal wounds. And Maître Vatinel recalls that “few areas of the body are spared. There was a strong altercation. When we see the wounds of display, of defense, we visualize a scene of struggle: one is on top, he delivers the blows, the ‘other suffers them’. The lawyer relives the scene in court, when the victim comes out of the boat under knife wounds. “There is a violent wind, the floor of the boat is moving, littered with objects on the ground. Franck Tamba arrives on the pontoon, drunk, he manages to reach the quay. It’s long and he loses a lot of blood. He is alive when it falls into the water. The lawyer addresses the jury : “We are talking to you about a causal link, remember the autopsy report, with 2 fatal wounds out of 9. We are talking to you about a multi-factorial cause of death.” It refocuses the debate ” on the intention of homicide at the moment when he carried out the blows. The scene degenerated. Between the weapon used, the intensity of the blows carried and the location, (we are targeting the thorax, the vital organs), in my opinion , you have enough elements to consider that there is intention. And concludes with the children, “left alone, without having obtained answers. It was their right. They will leave with this observation: I was deprived of my father for nothing at all. They ask you to give them their answer: tell them if their father died for nothing or despite everything from criminal acts.”
