Fabrice A., a malaise in court

A look at the news - Loris S. Musumeci

«The judges gave every appearance of an obvious bias against the defendant.»

More than three years after the murder of social therapist Adeline M., the Fabrice A. case has yet to be settled in court. No resolution seems possible; on the contrary, confusion reigns even though the facts are perfectly clear. Fabrice A., a patient at the Pâquerette mental asylum, had slit the throat of his curator, Adeline M., during an outing.

Le Regard Libre had already looked into the matter last year. The trial was held from October 3 to 7, 2016. It caused quite a stir, certainly because of the importance of the case, but also because of the behavior of the murderer, who was, to put it mildly, totally impassive. Everyone had their own interpretation of such indifference. Some focused on Fabrice A.'s fine malice, others exonerated him, understanding the atrocity of his act through its pathological effects.

Wanton malice or disease? It's not easy to fall into the trap of a single choice. Both are certainly there; the nuance lies more in distinguishing the roles. Is madness the cause of an act worthy of the coldest sadism? Or has a taste for evil led to a loss of mental control? Personally, the first hypothesis, with its many contrasts, seems more plausible. But what does it matter to share such a questioning? Nothing, at least in the public sphere. Beyond these legitimate debates, the main diagnosis to be drawn from the affair is a profound malaise in the justice system.

To see this, it's enough to sketch the absurdity of the case in broad strokes, verging on the vulgar. At the request of Fabrice A.'s defense, the Criminal Appeal Chamber dismissed the Criminal Court's appeal, on the grounds that «the judges gave every appearance of being clearly biased against the defendant».». They would even have mistreated the opinion of French psychiatric experts because of their sluggish analysis of the «convict». Under the influence of the Attorney General, who was bubbling over with aggression, they would have shown injustice, out of impartiality. The result of all this: the whole case is overturned. New judges must now take over the enormous case file and start the trial all over again.

What a sad picture! Not only is justice discredited, but the victim's family must endure the infernal game of eternal trials, with no verdict ever being reached. After all, we're dealing here with a psychopath who shows no signs of repentance and is ready to do it all over again, and with a dead mother. Clearly, the situation is more complicated than it seems. And yet, blood has been shed. The wolf has struck. The lambs remain silent, however, as the statue of the courts, sword in one hand, scales in the other, finds herself mutilated of her powers. It can no longer weigh up the seriousness of a murder, whatever the pathology that provoked it, nor can it determine, with its sharp blade, the assassin's guilt.

Write to the author: loris.musumeci@leregardlibre.com