A defendant was declared guilty on appeal of sexually assaulting Gisèle Pelicot after she was drugged unconscious by her spouse – and was given his incarceration period raised to ten years.
Appeal Trial
The defendant, 44, an out-of-work construction worker, who had appealed his initial guilty verdict last year, faced a retrial this week at the Nîmes court of appeal.
A jury of four women and five men, sitting with three judges, found Dogan guilty on Thursday of sexually assaulting Pelicot in her home in Provence in the morning of June 29, 2019.
The court heard that Dogan, a family man, made contact with Gisèle Pelicot’s husband at the time, Dominique Pelicot, in an internet forum named “unbeknownst to her”, where the husband was seeking men to visit his house to assault his wife once he had rendered her unconscious into a unconscious state.
We expect the jury will affirm that in this nation, human rights are also rights of women – that agreement is individual, not delegated,” declared the victim's attorney, her legal representative. “Permission is secured personally and not by proxy from a spouse.”
Case History
The ex-husband, among the most severe sexual predators in modern French history, was handed a sentence to two decades in prison last year for drugging his spouse and soliciting numerous individuals to sexually assault her in her home in the Provence village of the village of Mazan over a duration of nearly ten years of their marriage.
Dozens of additional defendants were found culpable in a widely publicized trial last year, and the appellant was the only man to challenge his conviction. He was first handed a term to nine years in prison, a sentence increased on Thursday to a decade.
The chief prosecutor, the prosecutor, had argued he should serve twelve years, because he “completely denies to take any responsibility”.
Evidence Presented
Dogan had initially sent Dominique Pelicot graphic images and then traveled an hour from his village in Provence to rape the victim, after telling his wife he was stepping out, the evidence indicated.
Pelicot, who was transported from segregation in prison to temporarily provide testimony at the appeal trial, informed the court that Dogan had been aware his wife had been “sedated” and he communicated to men by phone: “I’m looking for someone to violate my wife after I’ve rendered her unconscious without her consent.”
The proceedings became a key topic for a wider discussion on rape culture in society as Dogan continued to claim he was innocent and had not committed rape, stating that because the victim's husband had allowed him into the residence, his actions had been permissible.
The panel in the higher court was displayed visual proof of the victim's unresponsive form, unconscious and snoring in a unconscious condition, while a smiling the perpetrator committed rape multiple times over a duration of what investigators stated was three and a half hours. The court official said she had been at danger of death by suffocation. The state prosecution said there was no doubt that she had been unaware and had not consented.
Accused's Testimony
Dogan stated to the court the footage were simply “sexual encounters” and rejected it was rape. He said what he did was “a consensual activity”, not assault. He told the court: “I did not commit rape.” He said the victim's husband had invited him to the house, and therefore it was acceptable. He said he was deceived by Dominique Pelicot. “I tried to halt,” the accused informed the court. “I continued because he convinced me.”
Inquired if he wanted to make a closing remarks to the court, the defendant said: “I never wanted to hurt that woman.”
Victim's Response
The survivor, who was applauded upon exiting the courtroom each day by onlookers assembled to support her, told Dogan in court: “You haven’t understood. When are you going to recognise you violated me? It is illegal to assault an unconscious woman. How could I have give you permission? Never.”
The victim, seventy-two, became an symbol of resistance after she relinquished her right to confidentiality in the trial last year when she said: “The shame should shift.”
State's Argument
The prosecutor, addressing the victim in court, said the defendant's failure to take responsibility showed that: “The shame remains. The community is perhaps in the midst of that, perhaps propelled by the collective awareness brought by the revelation of your case.”
Sie said the defendant's claims of blamelessness showed how societal tolerance was still common in society as part of “outdated” forms of “male domination”. He said: “Now we must change rape culture to a ethos of permission.”
The prosecutor said to the defendant: “As long as you deny it, it’s not just a person, it’s an whole unpleasant societal structure that you are endorsing.”
Defendant's Background
Dogan was originated from Turkey and at the age of 5 came to France, where his parent worked as a concierge. The evidence indicated that his father was aggressive and that Dogan began consuming marijuana aged 10. When Dogan was 17 he was apprehended by authorities for drug trafficking and his parent evicted him of home. He was incarcerated in prison for drug dealing in his young adulthood and had worked as a laborer but had undergone periods of living on the streets.
He was wed and had a child with a genetic condition, who he was the principal carer for, as his wife worked in a school canteen. The court heard his spouse did not know he had regular sexual encounters beyond their marriage. His legal team said this was his way of coping with his challenging existence. The defendant had stated to a court psychologist that each year he looked for commercial sex on his birthday. His legal representatives stated to the court he had joint inflammation resulting from the pressure of the first trial.
