In the old chapel hosting the small courtroom of the judicial tribunal (the large one being closed for a civil engineering problem), the slightest outburst of voice quickly turns into a liturgical canon. This is the case with the first pass of arms between the defense and the prosecution… after only two minutes.
Me Yassine Maharsi then interrupts the reading of the warnings to request a dismissal. The Deputy Prosecutor is offended at not having been informed of this, as is customary. “Use must be different in Paris”, launches Paul-Édouard Lallois, in reference to the bar to which the lawyer is registered. “Do you really start like that? “, vocalizes the latter. “Are you as unsure of your case as you want to go on this ground? »
It’s a catch-all procedure, it must be restored
The tone is set. The meters will panic during this highly anticipated trial. Much awaited, especially, by the civil parties. But, exactly, how many customers of this company operating three garages, in Nevers, Sermoise-sur-Loire and La Guerche-sur-l’Aubois, do they complain? 57, counts the role of the audience. 43, corrects the Deputy Prosecutor. 64, says the defense.
Excuse me… What logic in the defense brandishing the biggest ladle? It seems that the four lawyers of the 31-year-old manager – in addition to Me Yassine Maharsi, there is Me Lola Dubois, from Bordeaux, Me Marie Seguin, from Nice, and Me Gabrielle Saint-André, from Nevers – hope that by increasing the number of combatants, there will be no combat.
“It’s a catch-all procedure, it must be restored,” says Me Lola Dubois. “The preliminary investigation was incriminating, biased and partial. This legal imbroglio is a lack of respect in court, ”engages Me Yassine Maharsi.
This is not a request for dismissal for dilatory purposes.
The defense called eight witnesses, again without notifying the other parties in advance. And she announces that she intends to ask 64 questions to one victim, 32 to another, 20 to a third. And so on. “This is not a request for dismissal for dilatory purposes, but for the sake of the proper administration of justice”, assures Me Marie Seguin. “This is not a case that deserves to be dealt with urgently”, punctuates Me Gabrielle Saint-André.
A day of hearing, which is planned, will not be enough, believes the defense. “It takes three,” weighs Me Yassine Maharsi. A few sentences later, it rises to five… And all this, only after a passage to the instruction. “The investigation is sloppy, bad,” he said. He cites an alleged collusion between his client and technical controllers, who would have validated the passage of cars not in roadworthy condition. “These controllers were not heard. While there are names in the procedure. I want to do a minute of silence for the death of law. »
The civil parties smell a scheme
The President of the Bar Alexandre Liancier is the spokesperson for all the civil parties. “Defending takes time,” he says. “I would have liked that, on October 26, already, my colleagues explain to me that they needed time. »
That day, only Me Gabrielle Saint-André is present, she requests a dismissal for “medical reasons”, because the defendant is hospitalized, attests to a medical certificate. The trial is postponed. But no request is made for an additional investigation of any kind.
This is the case now. “Is it, now, to save time? I will let you enjoy”, address to the court Me Alexandre Liancier. “I think I know why. He emphasizes that the civil parties are ready. “You see, I am pleading, for example, for a person who has not had a vehicle for two and a half years, without any compensation. How does she do it? »
There are four lawyers, how many will there be next time, ten?
Paul-Édouard Lallois has “the impression of being at a show in bad taste”. “There are four lawyers, how many will there be next time, ten? “, he draws. “I leave moreover to the room [les parties civiles] her thoughts on the fact that she [la prévenue] can afford four lawyers. »
Above all, he recalls that his “door was open during the preliminary investigation for any request”: “It is customary for there to be exchanges, moreover civil parties came, but no one came from the side of the defense “.
He deplores that justice is “held hostage by a Calimero-style defense”. ” Does it make you laugh ? “, he asks the defendant. “You’re going to have to take your shell off at some point, you’re going to have to become an adult. After this nervousness, he understands that, “given the number of people cited and the number of requests, the case cannot be judged today”.
The call for witnesses in The Journal of the Center talk
The bays rustle with a wavelet of disapproval, while Paul-Édouard Lallois decides to dismiss him. “You will not have a good quality trial”, he explains to them, “because of the regrettable choices of the defence”.
There are still some bitter exchanges between the deputy prosecutor and the defense, on the call for witnesses launched by the prosecution at the start of the proceedings, “astonishing” for the lawyers, on their fees which concern only them, that they are one, four or ten… Then the court withdraws into the tranquility of a deliberation room, away from the theater in three acts which has just been performed.
The outcome of the play comes after twenty-five minutes: the file is “returned to the prosecutor for investigation”. “In a good administration of justice, it is preferable that it be entrusted to an examining magistrate”, establishes the president Marie Willig. “It’s in your interest too,” she says to the address of the thirty civil parties present.
You filled your pockets well, it must be chests now
And the defendant, what does she say? Well, nothing. Because the word is given to him only to confirm his identity, his profession and his income. “The RSA,” she says. Before she leaves, surrounded by her four lawyers, a woman in the audience insults her. She does not react. “Ah, you can turn a deaf ear”, gets angry the lady. “You filled your pockets well, it must be chests now.” And we didn’t get a penny! »
The manager did participate in a trial, it was January 18, 2020, but she was on the other side of the bar, against a client who wanted to take justice into his own hands. Policeman by profession, he recovered his son’s car by refusing to pay the bill presented by the Sermoise garage, because the repairs would not have been carried out.
The leader accuses him of having knocked her down on the hood. His companion would have tried to intervene violently. Again, the hearing ended in a stalemate. The court judged the facts insufficiently characterized, on one side as on the other. Decidedly, Jypscar and justice, it’s a succession of missed appointments.
Heads of prevention. The defendant was, according to the prosecution, guilty of misleading commercial practices, breach of trust and non-compliant labeling. Odometers would have been tampered with on used cars, dates of first entry into circulation would have been disguised on the papers… The reading of the heads of prevention was limited to a few examples, the court did not go further in examining the facts. The case also includes a component related to the management of the various businesses of the respondent which, in addition to the resale of used vehicles, works in body painting, the trade in automobile parts, etc. For this, she would have resorted to moonlighting. Finally, there is an offense of slanderous denunciation. All of this will now be reviewed by an investigating judge who may or may not order additional acts of investigation, at the request of the parties or on his personal initiative.