Gisèle Pelicot, who was drugged by her husband with dozens of men accused of raping her, has emerged as a defiant public voice for victims of sexual abuse in France.
Gisèle Pelicot, 72, struck a defiant note during her testimony Wednesday as defense lawyers raised doubts about whether she was fully unconscious during the alleged rapes by dozens of men over a decade, suggesting she may have consented to the repeated assaults orchestrated by her former husband, Dominique Pelicot, 71.
“I have felt humiliated," an outraged Gisèle Pelicot said of the arguments alleging she was an alcoholic or being her ex-husband’s co-conspirator. “In the state I was in, I absolutely could not respond. I was in a comatose state; the videos show that.”
At least 83 men were recorded on video and photos assaulting an unconscious Pelicot; 50 of them have been identified and are currently on trial accused of raping her, which many of them deny. Two defense lawyers for some of the men had asked the court to display photos which they said raised doubts whether the victim was aware of what was happening to her.
…
Many of the defendants deny raping Pelicot. Some claim they were tricked by her husband, others say they believed she was consenting and others argue that her husband’s consent was sufficient.
How are the defense saying she consented while the accused himself is admitting guilt and saying he did it and is sorry?
Defense lawyers are supposed to try everything they can to defend their client, no matter how little sense it makes. It is theoretically possible for an admission of guilt to be false.
It’s up to the judge to understand their arguments are worthless and rule accordingly.
That’s how this is supposed to work.
I thought the defense and their defendant have to be on the same page. Like if he wants to plead guilty and such
