|
|
|
This page is being developped and will be devoted to cases and matters involving Justice and the judiciary system in France
Author contributions are welcomed
: Do not hesitate to let me know about your experience with the judiciary French system.The way a French painter, Jean-Louis Forain (1852-1931), saw the courts:
|
Recess of the Court
fromThe Metropolitan Museum of Art |
|
|
|
WARNING Nothing in this page should be construed as containing any criticism, implied or express, which might discredit the French Judiciary System (FJS). (FJS is protected by article 434-25 of the criminal Code, which provides for a six months jail term for any action the purpose of which would be to discredit FJS) |
Case one : A cop was killed in a drive by shooting nine years ago. Last year a prostitute went to the police and gave the name of her two pimps as the killers. Besides her word there was nothing neither material nor technical to implicate the two guys.
In court, the girl changed her story and testified that one of the guys was not involved in the shooting. When the trial was over, both guys got a twenty years sentence each. If the lady's word was sacred enough to bring the two guys to trial, then it was not enough to acquit the one who was not involved according to the lady's final testimony under oath in Court. There was no right to appeal as the trial is final.
Case two : In divorce proceedings, the wife produced in Court a pre-dated letter, which is technically a forgery, punished by a three years jail term.
Before the Judge investigating the case, the wife acknowledged that the letter was effectively pre-dated, but she said that the date of the letter had been changed by the photocopying machine and besides that she acted inadvertently when producing the letter in Court.
The Judge made the decision that the excuses were valid ones.
The irate husband pursued the matter before the Court of Appeals and ultimately before the Supreme Court (Cour de cassation).
The decision of the Judge was upheld eventually. So, it is now part of the jurisprudence of the French Supreme Court that (i) a photocopying machine may change the date of a document, and (ii) that inadvertence may be a valid excuse in penal matters.
Revised on February 5, 2005
