The decision was expected as the case has generated the mobilization of public opinion. The court of appeal of Paris has rejected on Thursday the parole application filed by Jacqueline Wild. At the age of 68 years, she was sentenced in December 2015 to 10 years in prison by the assize court of the Loir-et-Cher for having killed her abusive husband. Last January, she had been pardoned, partly by François Hollande.
“We are pretty appalled, because the motivation is exactly the same as in the first judgment,” and it deplores Me Janine Bonaggiunta, one of the lawyers of Jacqueline Wild. His sister, Me Nathalie Tomasini, speaks of a decision “shocking”.
The new refusal of access to the parole application of Jacqueline Wild could mark the end of the legal battle of the doomed. Prior to the rendering of the deliberations of Thursday, she had told her lawyers that she did not wish to make use of to obtain a release before the natural end of his sentence. With the reductions of sentences is automatic, it could now be out of jail in July 2018.
the”Position of victims”
Qualified as”anxious” and “patient” by its advocates, it is from his cell at the centre pénitentiaire de Réau, Seine-et-Marne, Jacqueline Wild has learned the decision of the court of appeal. Its advocates fail to understand the motivations of the court of appeal, which are based on three points.
In a first time, the judges blame the sixties “does not get out of the discourse on victimization in which it positions itself”, a position strengthened by the media coverage of his case. The court of appeal is of the view that Jacqueline Wild, which has already spent four years in prison, has filed too early an application for parole after his presidential pardon.
“She suffers as a result of the presidential pardon is partial, denounces Me Tomasini. All of the women victims have tried to help him and it turned against it.”
Defect in the decision of justice
For the judges, “the lack of recognition of the part of Jacqueline wild-her willingness to kill” calls into question an early release. The justice thus believes that she has not sought other solutions than to kill her husband. Incomprehensible to his defense, which denounces a lack of consideration of the situation of women victims of violence. “The company is not ready to understand what everyday life women who are victims of domestic violence”, and to attack the lawyer.
Finally, the defence of Jacqueline Wild points the finger at a defect in the judgment of the court of appeal. In the first instance, the justice had criticised Jacqueline Wild to have formulated a life plan for his release on parole in the vicinity of where her husband had been killed. On the 27th of October last, in the appeal, his lawyers had explained to them that their client would go, if it was released, live in the south of France at another of his daughters. Nonetheless, the court of appeal has resumed the argument in the court of enforcement of sentences by making a “copied-pasted”, according to the lawyers, of the first decision.
“They have not read the pieces, they have not read the conclusions”, takes Me Janine Bonaggiunta. With his colleague, they reserve the right to file an appeal.