Outreau, the other truth

Outreau, the other truth (original Outreau, l'autre vérité in French) is a French documentary directed by Serge Garde, released in France on March 6, 2013, and which deals with the French Outreau case.

Script

Subtitled Between the defense and the truth, there can be a gap, this film reviews the legal episode of Outreau, which is part of the film maker concern with regard to the victims of pedophilia. The film, which collects testimonies from several protagonists in the case - excluding the defense lawyers that did not want to participate in it - aims to show that Outreau and its dysfunctions are first and foremost an injustice done to the children. Criticizing the role of the media, it aims to be “an analysis of the manipulation of public opinion” and suggests that the affair was the subject of “instrumentalization by political power with the aim of suppressing the french function of examining judge". He would like to “encourage justice actors and journalists to reflect on the perverse effects of media coverage when it condemns victims to silence”. The documentary also criticizes the work of defense lawyers, their number and the influence they had with the media. This film, which includes the point of view of the victims, takes its title from the fact that if the judicial truth applies to acquitted adults, it must also be applied to children who have been recognized by the courts as victims of rape, sexual abuse and pimping. The expression “Other truth” marks this double aspect, Serge Garde being careful not to comment on the innocence or guilt of the acquitted people (in France an acquitted person cannot be retried for the facts).

The film contains interviews with legal expert Marie-Christine Gryson, whose expert work was called into question during the 2005 appeal trial, and author in 2009 of the book Outreau, la vérité abusée, 12 children recognized as victims (mentioned in the film credits, alongside the book by Serge Garde and Chérif Delay I am standing). Maintaining her position, she in turn criticizes the role of defense lawyers, and highlights the weakness of children having to testify. The film also interviews judge Fabrice Burgaud, described in the trailer as a “scapegoat”, the former member of the Constitutional Council Pierre Joxe, the former magistrate Michel Gasteau, who discusses the reversal of roles that occurred during the first trial from Outreau to Saint-Omer — the children, victims, are in the dock, and the accused placed in the public, with the journalists, for a question of space, the accused being more numerous than the children —, Myriam Badaoui's lawyer, Pascale Pouille Deldicque, who affirms that her defense colleagues have “through their manipulations, destabilized the children”, and the journalist from Le Point, Jean-Michel Décugis, who “explains how the political power would have used the Outreau affair to try to put causes the legitimacy of the investigating judge, considered too independent in certain sensitive political-financial matters”.

Media reception

The French media reception of the documentary aligned with the position of the lawyers of the acquitted, who criticized the new suspicion coming to bear on the acquitted with this documentary.

Criticism of the course of the Outreau affair

Several questions about the Outreau Affair are raised by the documentary film and the people who intervene in it:

• the substance of the case would not be based solely on the testimonies of Myriam Badaoui and her children : several of the accused having denounced each other during the investigation,
• the placement of children in the accused's box during the Saint-Omer trial, the room being too cramped to place the accused there,
• the imbalance in the legal representation of children (2 court-appointed lawyers) compared to that of the accused (17 lawyers including senior lawyers),
• the proximity between the journalists present at the trials and the defense lawyers, sharing the court benches and sometimes having lunch together,
• the defense media monopoly, the civil party not having wished to take part in the media coverage of the case,
• the non-possibility for children who testified in court to do so in good conditions, the defense lawyers cutting them off and insulting them, as it also happened for the experts who testified,
• the pressure exerted on the jurors so that the deliberations of the appeal trial did not last more than three hours, so that the verdict could be presented on the 1 p.m. news by the Minister of Justice (which could finally be done on the 8 p.m. news ),
• during the appeal trial, the prosecutor general of Paris, Yves Bot, apologized to the accused in front of the media, even before the verdict was rendered,
• the 12 children having been recognized as victims of pimping, questions arise regarding the consumers of this prostitution,
• the existence among the 12 children recognized as victims of five children from 3 families of acquitted persons,
• the denunciations by Daniel Legrand concerning the murder of a little girl, corroborated by other witnesses, would make it credible testimony,
• Judge Burgaud, who was the target of numerous attacks, was only very lightly reprimanded, and subsequently had a classic career
• much higher compensation for those acquitted than for children recognized as victims, on a scale of 10 to 1 (€300,000 to €1,000,000 to €30,000 for the children).