The people in this photo are the innocent people who spent years imprisoned and abused in this case (except for the woman in the middle of the top row; her falsely accused brother died in prison). Photo: AFP
The "Affaire d'Outreau" [pronounced doo-tro] was just a blip on the radar screen when I first read about it. Seventeen people were accused of child molesting in northern France and after a three-year investigation they came to trial in 2004. I had a hard time believing so many people, especially women, were involved in a ring of child molesters. It reminded me of the famous McMartin case in California where seven people, mostly women, were accused of child molesting at a kindergarten. After seven years of torment they were all acquitted.
I have to admit I didn't pay much attention to the case for a long time. But it was steadily perking along in the papers and then gradually seemed to grow less clear. Maybe some of them weren't child molesters. One of them killed himself in prison, having always protested he was innocent. Some of them were acquitted in 2004.
It became clearer that some of the people were guilty-- as it finally turned out, two couples had been abusing their own children, and one had made wild accusations left and right to incriminate people who were not involved. Those innocent people now went through a waking nightmare for three or even four years. Their children were taken away, they were treated by the jailers as known child molesters, and the evidence that they were innocent was ignored.
Right before Christmas, about two months ago, the twelve surviving accused in the d'Outreau case were acquitted of all charges. The French Minister of Justice then gave a press conference to apologize to the accused. At the time I mentioned the case in a short note at the bottom of a post.
I had known the French justice system was different from our own, but
one thing I had not realized is how much power the juge d'instruction
[Judge of Instruction] has from the beginning to the end of the affair.
In this case, the prisoners unfortunately fell upon a very young judge
right out of school (left), Burgaud, who was convinced of their guilt and of his own correct behavior-- to this day he has not apologized for the
disaster, even though it is clear he made grave mistakes.
The d'Outreau case was such a travesty of justice that there was a
parliamentary hearing this week. The twelve accused came down to Paris
from where they live, near the English Channel, to testify and the
testimony was broadcast almost live (with a 15-minute break to make sure no
children were mentioned by name). I heard only a few minutes over the
radio but it was one of the most heartbreaking things I have ever
heard. The reporter said that the legislators were openly weeping and
that even the tough soldiers of the 
honor guards (in photo), the Garde Républicaine,
were struggling to keep their composure.
The man I heard, Thierry Dausque, was asked what he thought of the judge Burgaud. He said that he did not expect the judge to apologize because all through the agony the judge had been very "suffisant"[self-satisfied].
"I hold him responsible for my three years of torture in prison; for the death of my mother [who stopped eating when he was arrested; he had to attend her funeral in handcuffs]; for my tormented children (mes enfants massacrés) [who were taken away from him for three years and put in the same school as the children who accused their father]; for the suicide of François Mourmand in prison [Mourmand died before being acquitted].
"Judge Burgaud will be heard in an open hearing next month and I am happy that I will be there. I think our positions are reversed now."
Other innocent people said that jailers had spat into their food, which they were then forced to eat; that they had been slapped; that they were put into solitary confinement for long months for no reason. The presumption of innocence was ignored; data that would have cleared their names was never looked at. Children of the innocent were encouraged into false accusations against their own parents by leading questions, and by being put into contact with children who really had been abused. The psychological expert judged that the accused all had the personalities of child molesters. One man testified how he was made to confront, alone and without a lawyer, the judge and the three people who accused him, each one accompanied by a lawyer.
France has been mesmerized by the testimony of the falsely accused. The system that gives so much power to one person, the judge, is now being questioned by ordinary French people. Even if the judge was clearly at fault, how much is the whole fiasco his responsibility? At each step, other people seemed to back up his judgment. To me it seemed obvious at first that trial by jury is fairer. But is it? The U.S. system, with its juries and long trials, can be very expensive for the accused (unless poor enough to qualify for a public-interest lawyer, who tends to be young and untried) and has also known its share of disasters.
One thing the hearings made horribly clear is that this could have happened to almost anyone. It's likely to have profound effects on the French legal system.
There was a similar situation in the little town Jordan, MN, USA, where 23 adults were accused of sexually abusing children under some bizarre situations. Everyone was acquitted. (One difference from l'Affaire d'Outreau is that these accused weren't jailed.)
I remember one town in which I lived that three 15 year-old girls accused a teacher of touching them inappropriately. The teacher lost his job and ended up with a divorce. Later the three girls said they lied and made up the story.
Truth and a good judiciary are sure important!
Posted by: William | 22 January 2006 at 22:31
TI also have been following this case quite closely... such a tragedy. I hope it will indeed affect the legal system for the better.
Posted by: Sammy | 23 January 2006 at 10:03