Defend Accused in #MeToo Rape Case: Should Lawyer Evolve?
- PARIS (AP) — Recent trials in France have ignited debate over the boundaries of legal defense and the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, particularly in cases of sexual assault.
- During the trial related to the "Mazan rapes" case involving Gisèle Pelicot, attorney philippe Kaboré reportedly questioned whether the victim had "exhibitionist inclinations." Another lawyer, El Bouroumi, allegedly...
- Henri Seckel, a journalist for Le Monde, described the atmosphere as reminiscent of "the last century, at the Aix-en-Provence Assizes in 1978" in a Sept.
Ethics and Defense: Lawyers’ Conduct Under Scrutiny in French Courts
PARIS (AP) — Recent trials in France have ignited debate over the boundaries of legal defense and the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, particularly in cases of sexual assault. The courtroom conduct of some attorneys has drawn criticism, raising questions about the balance between vigorous defense and respect for victims.
Controversial Defense Tactics
During the trial related to the “Mazan rapes” case involving Gisèle Pelicot, attorney philippe Kaboré reportedly questioned whether the victim had “exhibitionist inclinations.” Another lawyer, El Bouroumi, allegedly “hurl[ed]” accusations, while Isabelle Crépin-dehaene suggested a “sexual game” between the spouses. Another attorney, De Palma, stated, “There is rape and rape.”
Henri Seckel, a journalist for Le Monde, described the atmosphere as reminiscent of “the last century, at the Aix-en-Provence Assizes in 1978” in a Sept. 19, 2024, article titled “The accused accuser.” This title echoed a previous chronicle from Jan. 30, 2019, concerning the trial of the “rape of the 36 quay of goldsmiths,” were a Canadian tourist accused police of rape. In that case, the victim’s lawyer denounced “the trial of the victim,” citing scrutiny of her attitude, dress, and use of antidepressants.
More recently, in the trial of Gérard Depardieu, who is accused of rape and sexual assault, his lawyer Jérémie Assous referred to one of the civil parties, Charlotte Arnould, as “this unhappy, this mythomaniac,” and made disparaging remarks about her and her sisters. These comments prompted a forum in Le Monde on March 28,signed by 200 lawyers,asserting that “sexism against lawyers should no longer have its place in hearing.”
Assous responded on April 9, invoking “the principle of contradictory,” stating that “as unpleasant as it may be for the complainants, a trial is not an expiatory ceremony.” These incidents have sparked a broader discussion about the limits of the right to defense and the corresponding ethical obligations of lawyers.
Balancing Free Speech and Ethical Conduct
Article 41 of the 1881 law on the freedom of the press grants lawyers speech immunity, protecting their statements and writings during judicial debates unless they are deemed “abusive, outrageous or defamatory.” Article 3 of the Code of Ethics of the Profession requires lawyers to uphold ”the principles of honor, loyalty, equality and non-discrimination, disinterestedness, confraternity, delicacy, moderation and courtesy.”
Laure Heinich, a penalist who represents both alleged perpetrators and victims of sexual violence, cautions that these high-profile examples do not represent typical courtroom defense strategies. She notes that, in the majority of cases, judges intervene when lawyers attempt to unfairly blame victims, ofen resulting in harsher sentences. Heinich acknowledges that the adversarial nature of legal proceedings can be “a certain violence for the victim” but emphasizes that “the criminal trial is not that of the civil party,” allowing for challenges to evidence without directly attacking the complainant.
In the preface to the book Sexual Violence. When Justice Mistreats, scheduled for release May 8, magistrate Magali Lafourcade encapsulates the challenge of legal defense: “Criminal justice should be carried by two spurring: its effectiveness is based on the search for the manifestation of the truth; His honor on the human treatment of all parties to the trial.”
During his pleading before the criminal court of Vaucluse, Antoine Camus, a lawyer for Gisèle Pelicot, argued that ”certain defense strategies no longer have their place in a legal enclosure in france, in the 21st century. If the defense is free, she also says what we are.”
#MeToo’s Influence on Legal practice
Guilaine Michel, who defends one of the 51 accused in the “Mazan rapes” trial, has been a member of the bar for two years. She says she “became a lawyer after #MeToo.” When asked about the movement’s impact on her practice, she acknowledged, “It’s possible… But it never limited my defense but I integrated it.” She emphasizes empathy for civil parties and avoids shifting blame onto victims, a tactic she describes as “often a reflex of the authors.” Michel believes that taking duty ultimately benefits her clients.
Ethics and Defense: Navigating the Legal Minefield in French Courts
Q: WhatS the main issue being discussed in French courts right now regarding lawyers?
A: Recent trials in France, especially those involving sexual assault allegations, have sparked a heated debate about the conduct of lawyers and their ethical responsibilities. The focus is on the balance between the right to a vigorous defense and the need to respect victims. Some lawyers’ courtroom tactics have drawn considerable criticism.
Q: What specific defense strategies employed by some lawyers have come under fire?
A: Certain tactics used during trials in France have been deemed controversial. For instance, in the “Mazan rapes” case, some attorneys questioned the victim’s behavior, suggesting “exhibitionist inclinations” or a “sexual game.” in the Gérard Depardieu trial,the lawyer for the accused referred to the accuser in disparaging terms. These strategies,some of which involved questioning the victim’s character directly,have prompted criticism.
Q: What are some specific examples of controversial statements made by lawyers in these cases?
A: Some lawyers have made statements that have drawn criticism, such as:
Philippe Kaboré, in the “Mazan rapes” trial, reportedly questioned whether the victim had ”exhibitionist inclinations.”
El Bouroumi allegedly “hurl[ed]” accusations
Isabelle Crépin-dehaene suggesting a “sexual game” between the spouses.
De Palma stating, “There is rape and rape.”
* Jérémie Assous, in the Gérard Depardieu case, referred to a civil party as “this unhappy, this mythomaniac.”
Q: How has the #MeToo movement influenced legal practice in France?
A: While not explicitly quantifying its impact, the content provided points to an increased awareness within the legal profession. One lawyer, Guilaine Michel, stated she “became a lawyer after #MeToo” and now emphasizes empathy for civil parties, avoiding victim-blaming. This suggests a shift towards more sensitive and considered approaches in defense strategies.
Q: What legal protections do lawyers have when speaking in court?
A: Lawyers are granted speech immunity under Article 41 of the 1881 law on the freedom of the press. This protects their statements and writings during judicial debates, unless they are deemed “abusive, outrageous or defamatory.”
Q: What is the general consensus about these tactics?
A: The criticism is twofold. Both journalist Henri Seckel and lawyer Antoine Camus imply these defense strategies are outdated or have no place in modern france. The comments from lawyers and journalist suggest such tactics undermine fairness and respect.
Q: What ethical guidelines are lawyers expected to follow in france?
A: Article 3 of the Code of Ethics of the Profession in France requires lawyers to uphold the principles of honor, loyalty, equality, non-discrimination, disinterestedness, confraternity, delicacy, moderation, and courtesy. Thus, even within the context of legal defense, lawyers are bound by ethical obligations that govern their behavior.
Q: Do these debates have an impact on how the court system functions?
A: Yes, the debates have ramifications in the court system.In the preface to the book Sexual Violence. When Justice Mistreats, magistrate Magali Lafourcade highlights the challenging balance in the criminal justice system: “Criminal justice should be carried by two spurring: its effectiveness is based on the search for the manifestation of the truth; His honor on the human treatment of all parties to the trial.”