The Doubs Assize Court found the young man guilty of the murder of Thomas Mercier, rejecting the abolition of his discernment, but retaining its alteration at the time of the facts, in accordance with the requisitions of the prosecutor Claire Keller.
“I want to remain silent”: during his entire interrogation, the accused answered this sentence over and over again, to dozens of questions asked by the Court and the lawyers. He remained impassive, his gaze fixed and empty, without providing any explanation for his gesture.
Why did you kill Thomas Mercier whom he didn’t know? His reasons remain “obscure”, in police custody, “he spoke of hallucinations”, notes the prosecutor. From now on, (he) imposes his unbearable silence on us.”
Psychotic episode
But the parties agree that he acted during a delusional and mystical episode, a psychotic episode caused by the combined use of cannabis and cocaine two days before the murder.
On November 9, 2021, at around 11:30 a.m., the accused went to a building in downtown Besançon and randomly knocked on doors. Thomas Mercier, a brilliant watch engineer, recently graduated from the Ecole des Mines de Paris and living in Besançon for a month, opened the door.
The 30-year-old young man was then sprayed with tear gas, pushed inside his apartment and knocked out with an Italian coffee maker. He collapsed to the ground before being finished off with 22 scissor blows, including a fatal one which pierced his lung and heart.
The attacker went back to take a shower, change his clothes and get a haircut. Driving his car, he drove towards a police vehicle to escape.
During the afternoon, he will meet several people to whom he will say that he “knows the Devil”, “has seen God” and has “killed a man”, and is ready to kill others.
Drugged “in all conscience”
He was finally arrested by the police at 4:50 p.m. and immediately admitted the facts.
“There was indeed madness in (this) gentleman, before and after the facts, and I want it to be recognized,” forcefully pleaded his lawyer Me Catherine Bresson, demanding in vain that the jurors retain the abolition of his discernment.
“This man is not an irresponsible madman, but a man who took drugs in full awareness of the effects that this had on his behavior. He is responsible for it,” argued for the civil party, Me Jérôme Pichoff, castigating his “factitious and useful amnesia.”
