“The challenge of this trial is to avoid one of the greatest miscarriages of justice of this century.” On the eve of the debates, lawyer Sylvie Noachovitch sets the tone. His client, Mamadou Diallo, will be retried from Thursday in Lyon before the Rhône Assize Court for the murder of Catherine Burgod, a murder of which he was nevertheless acquitted last year “with the benefit of the doubt”. But the public prosecutor’s office appealed this decision, considering that it was the true “unknown of the post office”.
Who killed the postal worker from Montréal-la-Cluse this morning of December 19, 2008 by stabbing her 28 times, while she was expecting her third child? On the side of the civil parties, the involvement of Mamadou Diallo is beyond doubt. Their lawyer Jean-François Barre intends to demonstrate this. “In view of the charges against him, in view of his fluctuating statements and his elusive explanations, we are convinced that his guilt is proven,” he explains.
DNA, “precise proof”
The accused was at the scene on the day of the tragedy. He went to the village post office to buy a train ticket. It was there that he discovered the victim, saw a wad of banknotes which he pocketed before panicking to the point of fleeing without calling for help. A version of the facts which does not hold water, according to Jean-François Barre. His DNA, which matched ten years later, was found inside a black bag left next to the mother. But also on one of the handles of a cash drawer. “It’s precise proof,” said the lawyer.
“Given the short time during which Madame Burgod was killed, around half an hour, this would mean that Mamadou Diallo would have arrived only ten to fifteen minutes after the murderer. If he had called for help, I don’t think he would have been charged with murder. All this seems convoluted and this combination of facts leaves us perplexed,” he continues, putting forward the thesis of a “robbery gone wrong”.
The “robbery gone wrong” thesis
“Perhaps at the beginning he came with this bag to take the money and did not intend to kill, that Madame Burgod objected and things continued,” he argues. . A theory swept aside by Sylvie Noachovitch having acquired the “certainty” that her client is “innocent”.
“He came home, he saw this horrible scene but he was 19 years old. He was very young,” argues the defense lawyer, arguing that the accused panicked under the effect of “traumatic anesthesia.” “When we are in shock, we commit irrational acts. He wiped his hands in the bag after checking if the victim was still alive. Then he stole the money and ran away. But would a culprit leave his DNA behind? », she questions.
The Thomassin trail resurfacing?
“He was not acquitted by chance at first instance. The experts have confirmed that everything Mamadou Diallo says is true but justice does not want to leave a murder unsolved,” continues the lawyer, thus denouncing “horrible judicial relentlessness”.
The defense intends to direct the jurors to other avenues “neglected” by the investigators “who did not follow through”. That of the “jealous husband” who could not bear to be “left a few days before the tragedy” and who “could not justify his schedule”. That of Gérald Thomassin, actor revealed in “The Little Criminal” who became an outsider. The man, who “delivered disturbing confessions” was suspected for a long time before mysteriously disappearing while he was on his way to a summons to appear before the investigating judge. “I’m not accusing anyone but anything is possible. There are other number 1 suspects,” pleads Sylvie Noachovitch.
“In this case, only one person was referred to the court and that is Mamadou Diallo,” replies Jean-François Barre. The DNA is Diallo’s, not Thomassin’s. At Thomassin’s house, no blood from the victim was ever found. Thomassin was a bit like the wanderer who frightened, the one who intrigued, who lived next to the post office. It’s a fantasy… very useful for defense. »
The verdict is expected on October 20.