At the trial of Marcel Vadella for the murder and attempted murder of the Fadil brothers, the objectivity of the investigation and premeditation in question

Was Marcel Vadella acting in self-defense on December 19, 2020, by shooting Jamal and Jaoide Fadil, killing the first and seriously injuring the second? The trader has been appearing since Tuesday and until Friday before the Haute-Corse assizes for murder and attempted murder. Facts for which he faces up to 30 years of criminal imprisonment.

Light blue shirt, jeans and carefully combed hair, Marcel Vadella listens attentively to the detailed reminder of the facts by the president of the Assize Court, Michel Bonifassi.

Placed in pre-trial detention for 36 months, and since July 2023 under electronic surveillance, the fifty-year-old is free to appear this Tuesday, November 26 before the Assize Court of Haute-Corse. This trader is accused of the murder of Jamal Fadil, and the attempted murder of Jaoide Fadil.

The facts date back to December 19, 2020. It was around 3 p.m., when police officers were mobilized for shots fired at the bar “L'Arcole”, located rue Santa Maddalena, Lupino district, in Bastia.

On site, they found Marcel Vadella, a local merchant, who immediately confirmed to them that he was the perpetrator of the shooting. His weapon, a 9mm semi-automatic pistol, is still in his back pocket. At the scene, investigators also discovered the body of Jamal Fadil. Hit by a projectile in the chest, his death was confirmed by a forensic doctor.

Placed in police custody, Marcel Vadella indicates that he is the owner of another bar, “Le Typique”, located not far from the scene of the events, and managed for several years by Jamal and Jaoide Fadil.

The latter, he explained to investigators, had not paid him rent for several months, accumulating a debt estimated at 9,000 euros. A situation that is the source of a major conflict between the merchant and the two brothers, the first wanting the eviction of the latter's premises.

On December 18, 2020, the day before the events, a violent clash occurred between the three men, says Marcel Vadella. The Fadil brothers would have, he assures, conditioned their departure against the payment of 80,000 euros, before beating him.

Examined in the evening by a doctor, he received 15 days of total incapacity for work (ITT). At the same time, he is preparing a file with a view to filing a complaint for the violence, which will be noted by investigators. Finally, Marcel Vadella sends a registered letter demanding payment of rent.

The next day, when he went to his bar, Marcel Vadella said he took a handgun with him, but only for the purpose of defending himself if he were to be attacked by the two brothers. And quickly, they come to meet him, he assures.

The tone rises, Marcel Vadella says he is jostled and sees the blade of a knife in Jamal Fadil's hands. Frightened, he shoots the two brothers, then goes to a hair salon and asks the owner to contact the police. The trader assures, in police custody, that he did not intend to kill.

Faced with investigators, Jaoide Fadil describes a very different version of the facts. On the day of the tragedy, the man, hit in the leg and hip, went on his own to the hospital, where he was given 180 days of ITT.

According to Jaoide Fadil, the rents were duly paid to Marcel Vadella, but in cash, and therefore without proof. He denies having threatened the merchant and asking him for the sum of 80,000 euros.

On December 19, he explains having seen Marcel Vadella punch his brother, who in return defended himself. He then stands back, he says. It was when he approached to separate them that Marcel Vadella opened fire, shooting him first, then his brother, before targeting him again. He says he took refuge behind a car and contacted his partner so she could take him to the emergency room.

According to Jaoide Fadil, his brother was not holding a knife. During their initial findings, the investigators did not find the weapon in question, either on the victim, or at the scene of the incident.

Premeditation or self-defense ?

Was there an intention to kill or any premeditation on the part of Marcel Vadella? Can self-defense be invoked? If the investigations sought to answer these questions, “we could not completely determine it“, admits the first witness of the morning on the stand. The latter was, at the time, the head of the judicial police branch responsible for the investigation.

The investigation, he argues, nevertheless seems to prove that it was the Fadil brothers who first came into contact with Marcel Vadella, on December 19, before the shots, and not the other way around. A knife was also found long after the incident between the slats of the “Typique” terrace. However, there is nothing to certify whether or not it is the bladed weapon that the accused claims to have seen in the hands of Jamal Fadil, and whether or not it belonged to the latter.

Marcel Vadella, explains the director of investigation, was known to the police for “little unimportant facts“. Jamal and Jaoide Fadil, on the other hand, already had a heavier criminal record, for cases involving drugs, violence and threats, or even, for the second, organized gang fraud. Jamal Fadil also portrays a electronic bracelet.

The head of the Bastiaise PJ specifies this : this file included, for the judicial police, a “sensitivity criterion” to the extent that Marcel Vadella's brother worked and still works today within the police in Bastia. He also went to the scene in civilian clothes on the day of the tragedy.

However, the investigation was carried out objectively, assures the witness. An assertion contested by Me Mourad Battikh, counsel for Jaoide Fadil. The lawyer thus denounces the summary report produced by the police officers, which illustrates, according to him, investigations carried out for both prosecution and exoneration.

With in particular a significant and regular focus, he deplores, on the judicial past and the real or supposed misdeeds attributed to his client. Enough to demonstrate, according to Me Mourad Battikh, a certain desire to “discredit“the words of Jaoide Fadil and”lock him up in a straightjacket“, when the terms would be more measured in the case of Marcel Vadella.

Never, at any time, can we be accused of having concealed part of the investigation or anything.

“The report does not call into question the scene, decides in response the director of investigation. The perpetrator was barely known to the police, and it turns out that the police knew your client very well at that time. If we didn't mention it, we wouldn't be doing our job.“

Could the position of Marcel Vadella's brother within the police have influenced the course of the investigation? The former boss of the Bastiaise PJ firmly refutes this. “Never, at any time, can we be accused of having concealed part of the investigation or anything. If it can reassure you, he slips to the lawyer, I owe nothing to Mr. Vadella's brother and he owes me nothing. We conducted the investigation without any pressure, and [le frère de Vadella] never cared to know how the investigations were progressing.“

The public prosecutor of Bastia, Jean-Philippe Navarre, chose to focus on the knife mentioned by Marcel Vadella and whose existence has never been formally demonstrated by the investigations. “If the investigation had proven the presence of a knife, is this an element of self-defense? ?“, he asks the head of investigation. “Logic dictates that if he was threatened with a knife, he would rather find himself in a situation of self-defense.“, replies the latter.

“When we find three or four shots, does that rather reflect a form of intentionality, a voluntary gesture?”

However, continues the prosecutor, Marcel Vadella did not shoot once, but at least three. “When we find three or four shots, does that rather reflect a form of intentionality, a voluntary gesture ?“Without responding directly to this point, the director of investigation notes that the weapon held by the accused had been chambered, and was therefore ready for use.”This means that in the person's mind, the weapon must be ready to serve“, concludes the witness.

The return of the lunch break – taken several hours late, the fault of an overly optimistic and largely outdated hearing schedule – saw several witnesses take the stand one after the other.

The shopkeeper to whom Marcel Vadella went just after the shooting to ask him to call for help, a former employee of his bar, a neighbor who was near the scene of the shooting, the brother-in-law of the accused , the ex-partner of Jaoide Fadil… One by one, they all detail their version of the facts, reporting what they saw and what they heard, in front of jurors who often look tired by the length of the discussions.

The trial continues this Wednesday, with the hearing, in particular, of the expert doctors and the ballistics expert. The verdict is expected this Friday, November 30.