Six o’clock. This is the time it took the jurors of the Finistère Assize Court to deliberate on the guilt of Mickaël Sousseing and Didier Stephan in the murder, in February 2022, in Brest, of Yoann L’Abbé. The time necessary to return to the particularly violent facts of this affair. To sort the numerous information provided by the experts. But above all, to debate the responsibility of the two accused. Two notorious delinquents, with damaged lives, sharing the same demons.
On the night of February 18 to 19, these two Brestois, aged 43 and 39, were in Yoann L’Abbé’s apartment in the Bellevue district of Brest to consume drugs and alcohol. The three men share an addiction to cocaine, cannabis and crack. During the evening, an altercation broke out, and Mickaël Sousseing beat Yoann L’Abbé to death, in front of Didier Stephan’s eyes. An extremely violent crime scene that is worth, for one, being accused of murder. For the other, to be accused of failure to assist a person in danger.
The intention to kill at the heart of the debates
Throughout the trial, two points focused the attention of the civil parties and the defense: the intentionality of Mickaël Sousseing to kill Yoann L’Abbé as well as the presumed state of astonishment of Didier Stephan. On this first point, if Mickaël Stephan mentions a “slip”, Gabriel Rollin, general counsel, disagrees: “He said, from the start of the hearing, that he did not want to kill him. This is the classic defense for someone accused of murder, notes the magistrate. His co-accused nevertheless spoke of “monumental right”, of “penalties”… The picture is appalling. » During the hearings, several close to Mickaël Sousseing described his explosive character. For the Advocate General, this tendency to be brutal is not likely to alter his discernment. “Some may say that Mr. Sousseing did not think about what he was doing. But what intention can one have when one inflicts dozens of blows on a person, when one strangles them to the point of breaking their bones? No one deserves to die like this. » His lawyers, Me Pellen and Me Meunier, procrastinate: “We are of course much closer to murder than to involuntary manslaughter, recognizes Me Meunier. But Mr. Stephan himself said that Mr. Sousseing did not want to kill Mr. L’Abbé. The evidence is that he thought he was breathing when they left the apartment.”
-As for Didier Stephan, accused of not having provided assistance to Yoann L’Abbé, his lawyers are asking for his release: “To be found guilty of failure to provide assistance, one must have voluntarily refrained from providing assistance. This implies inhuman indifference. However, we maintain that Mr. Stephan is innocent of this vice,” argued Me Quantin. Citing the law, the lawyer recalls that failure to assist a person in danger implies not having helped the person, either immediately or by calling for help. “Mr Stephan tried to stop the violence. He told us. He didn’t succeed but he tried. He couldn’t do more because he was in total fear. » His other lawyer, Me Garrec, also recalled the syndrome he suffers from: “He is being prosecuted even though he has Down syndrome. If he had been taken care of from childhood, he would have been taught to have reactions in symbiosis with society.” The attorney general requested 20 years of criminal imprisonment against Mickaël Sousseing and five years of imprisonment, two of which were suspended for Didier Stephan. Mickaël Sousseing was finally sentenced to 30 years of criminal imprisonment and Didier Stephan to five years of imprisonment, three of which were suspended.
Belgium
