The article covers the testimony of Dominique D. in the Mazan rape trial, where he initially admitted to being an accomplice in the rapes of Gisèle Pélicot. Despite acknowledging his role, he later claimed he was misled by Dominique Pélicot and believed he had the victim’s consent. The court questioned his defense, highlighting the contradictions in his statements. Other co-defendants are also examined as the trial progresses, revealing patterns of complicity in these crimes.
In a gripping development during the Mazan rape trial, one defendant, Dominique D., stood out due to his unique position. As one of the few individuals to fully acknowledge his actions, he was labeled as “the best accomplice” of Dominique Pélicot, who horrifically assaulted his unconscious wife on six occasions. On October 16, 2024, the Vaucluse departmental criminal court was presented with Dominique D., one of 51 defendants in this shocking case. Since his arrest in March 2021, the 45-year-old had confessed to all charges, stating he was aware that Gisèle Pélicot had been unknowingly drugged by her husband. He recalled the meticulous steps taken to ensure she was not awakened. However, upon taking the stand, this former military and truck driver dramatically changed his narrative, claiming he had fallen victim to his own “naivety” and the deceitful manipulations of Dominique Pélicot, leading him into a “trap“.
“I believed I perceived Madame Pélicot’s consent through Monsieur Pélicot”
According to reports from our colleagues at Le Point and Le Monde, Dominique D. recounted to the court that he felt he had received “optimal guarantees” regarding the victim’s consent. He had previously viewed a webcam feed of Mrs. Pélicot after her shower and later encountered her in person, where she appeared “sitting in the sun, reading“. When questioned why he didn’t speak with her directly, he explained, “Initially, it was Monsieur Pélicot who wanted to gift something to his wife for Valentine’s Day,” referring specifically to an incident that took place on February 14, 2015. He then questioned, “If she is unconscious, how is that a gift?“, ultimately admitting it was more for Monsieur Pélicot’s benefit. He added, “I always thought I perceived Madame Pélicot’s consent through Monsieur Pélicot, believing he was the one giving it. Reflecting on his actions, he remarked, “You should have said stop and denounced it; you weren’t brave enough.”
Dominique D. later acknowledged that after his fourth visit to Mazan, he recognized Gisèle Pélicot was not consenting, initially mistaking her use of tranquilizers as innocuous. However, he learned she was actually administered sleeping pills. Yet he returned to the Pélicot residence two additional times, expressing in court, “I shouldn’t have given in to temptation“. Overall, he participated in six rapes between February 2015 and September 2020. Meanwhile, Dominique Pélicot has continuously placed blame on his co-defendants since the trial began, claiming to be “the most complicit” individual despite full awareness of his wife’s drugged state. A particularly damning piece of evidence shown in court depicted a forced act occurring after what Dominique D. described as a wake-up call, revealing signs of Gisèle Pélicot’s slumber.
Three other repeat offenders, each involved in six incidents, faced scrutiny
In court, Dominique D. attempted to minimize his actions by stating, “There were enough guarantees for me, everything seemed right. I simply overlooked one crucial guarantee: Madame’s consent.” This claim provoked outrage from the victim’s lawyer, Me Antoine Camus, who retorted, “Do you realize that your statements insult my client? After fully admitting your actions, you’re now claiming this was an accident that repeated six times?” The president of the court and other officials similarly displayed growing frustration. Judge Roger Arata asked, “Can we honestly believe Ms. Pélicot was part of the scheme from the very first instance?” While Laure Chabaud pointedly challenged his inconsistencies, questioning how he admitted in custody that he knew Mrs. Pélicot was drugged without her awareness, evoking the complexity of her consent.
Faced with mounting evidence, Dominique D. conceded he was aware “that this pill was administered to Madame Pélicot without her knowledge“. While he acknowledged the “material facts“, he maintained he did not intend to commit a crime. Among the fifty co-defendants, three others were also repeat offenders, each visiting the Mazan residence six times. Jérôme V., 46, expressed his “shame” and profound regret in court; Charlie A., 30, and 63-year-old Romain