Why are the co-accused of the “Mazan rapes” granted anonymity?

Photo: Christophe Simon Agence France-Presse Gisèle Pelicot, ex-wife of the accused Dominic Pelicot, in front of the courthouse in Avignon, in the south of France.

Stéphanie Marin

Published at 16:03

• Europe

In the “Mazan rapes” case, Dominique Pelicot is not alone before the criminal justice system: he has 50 co-accused. Those who browse social networks may have seen the list of these men’s first and last names, circulated by various groups and citizens, but they are not identified in the French media. Why aren’t their full names circulating in newspapers and on TV, as would have been the case in Quebec and Canada? ?

Before the Avignon court in France, Mr. Pelicot is accused, among other things, of having drugged his ex-wife, Gisèle, and of having given her to about fifty men who allegedly raped her repeatedly while she was unconscious, over a period of about 10 years. Their trial began on September 2 and is expected to last nearly four months. European media only indicate the initials of the co-accused, or their first name and the first letter of their last name: for example, we know that there is Cyrille D., Jacques C. and Lionel R.

In Canada, trials are open to all, with exceptions (in family law, for example), and the names of adult defendants are public information. So, the basic rule is that the media can establish their identity.

These are the same rules in France.

In the Pelicot trial, “there are no legal restrictions on the disclosure” of the names of the accused in the media, maintains Me Armelle Fourlon, a lawyer specializing in media law, in an interview from Paris.

Gisèle Pelicot had been offered a trial in “camera,” meaning that the public would not have had access to the proceedings and the names of the co-accused. But she refused and the hearings became public, explained Me Fourlon.

So why do the media keep quiet about the full names of the accused even though they can broadcast them??

At the base, there is respect for the presumption of innocence that all accused benefit from until they are found guilty. For this reason, the media cannot call them “rapists.”

They could, however, clearly specify that they are “accused” and not “convicted.” But in the case of this exceptional case, “which has an extreme impact in France and elsewhere,” and where the facts are “particularly serious,” “the media are taking a particularly high level of caution” with regard to the dissemination of names, notes Me Fourlon.

It is an editorial choice, which can therefore vary from one media to another, she notes, but for the moment, they have all chosen the same way of proceeding. “There is a form of consensus not to go any further at this stage of the trial,” which could however change along the way.

200% Deposit Bonus up to €3,000 180% First Deposit Bonus up to $20,000

Without knowing the reasons behind this choice, Me Fourlon suggests that the media may be wondering whether there is a real public interest in the names being known. There may also be a desire to avoid slip-ups, in cases where there is fear that people will attack the accused and their families. And perhaps also a desire not to “pollute” the trial with facts related to possible harassment of the accused’s relatives, which could divert attention from the actions they may have taken, she continued.

Moreover, in several European countries — in Sweden, for example — the norm is not to reveal the names of the accused, even when they are convicted. There is a desire to protect their families and allow for their rehabilitation.

In Canada and the United States, the accused are usually named, except, of course, when publication bans are issued, as was the case in the trial for the death of the “Granby girl.” Here too, media outlets sometimes choose not to name an accused, but this is the exception rather than the rule.

Read also

• Dominique Pelicot's rape trial stirs up disquiet in the village of Mazan
• “Chemical submission”, a crime here too, under another name

A list circulating

On social networks, a list of the names of the accused, sometimes even accompanied by photos, is circulating. Those who disseminate this information risk two things, according to two French lawyers consulted by Le Devoir.

First, given the presumption of innocence, those who now publish the names of the accused by calling them rapists risk committing defamation, says Bordeaux lawyer Margaux Castex, who specializes in criminal law. Indeed, she points out that Article 29 of the law of July 29, 1881 on freedom of the press defines defamation as: “Any allegation or imputation of a fact that harms the honor or reputation of the person or body to whom the fact is attributed is defamation.”

If the accused are found not guilty at the end of the trial, those who published their names with the label of rapist (including the media) risk having to open their wallets. “On the other hand, if people on the list are convicted, there will be nothing reprehensible in the name of freedom of expression and information,” says Me Castex.

But beyond defamation, criminal proceedings can be brought.

Article 223-1-1 of the French Penal Code prohibits “revealing, disseminating […] information relating to the private, family or professional life of a person that allows them to be identified or located for the purpose of exposing them or their family members to a direct risk of harm to the person or property that the perpetrator could not be unaware of.” This offense is punishable by a maximum of 3 years in prison and a fine of €45,000 (CA$67,000).

The lawyers for the defendants in the Mazan trial say that this risk has already materialized.

“Children of the accused were attacked at school. Wives and relatives of the accused were insulted. Malicious phone calls were received, with attempts to invade their homes,” said a lawyer for the accused, Isabelle Crépin-Dehaene, on behalf of the group on Monday. “The seriousness of these facts leads us, the defense lawyers, to have to refer the matter to the public prosecutor's office for criminal proceedings in order to prevent any new forms of violence, or even, as is to be feared, attacks on the physical integrity of the accused and their relatives. »

Here, what is often called doxing — publicly revealing public information such as a person's phone number and address for malicious purposes — would be covered by the offence of criminal harassment, among other things.