PARIS – A Moroccan-born man convicted three decades ago in the murder of a wealthy widow on the French Riviera will not face a new trial, a top French court ruled on Thursday. , the latest developments in one of France’s most enduring murder mysteries.
Omar Raddad, once convicted of the 1991 murder of 65-year-old Ghislaine Marchal, lives alone in a large mansion north of Cannes. Police found her dead in the locked basement of a mansion’s annex, where a message written in Ms Marchal’s own blood appeared to accuse Mr Raddad, her gardener at the time. .
Mr. Raddad, 60 years old, has always maintained his chastity. He was released from prison more than two decades ago, but has sought a new trial to reverse the sentence and clear his name.
France has long been captivated by the unsolved mysteries of the brutal murder and by the social elements of the case, involving two protagonists from completely different backgrounds: one wealthy victim from a prominent family and a working-class Arab immigrant who could not read or write and spoke little French.
The case became particularly intriguing because of a strange grammatical error in the message allegedly scribbled by Miss Marchal, who was found with multiple bruises and cuts behind a barred door. While she seems to have written “Omar killed me,” this sentence contains an obvious error – in the original French, “Omar m’a tuer,” instead of “m’a tuée”, uses the infinitive. instead of a past tense form.
Mr. Raddad’s defenders argue that a woman of Marchal’s lineage would not have made such a mistake, even in her dying moments.
His DNA and fingerprints were never found at the crime scene. Mr. Raddad’s supporters argue that he was framed and easily convicted because of his background, and that prominent intellectuals aided his cause.
His lawyers succeeded in reopen part of the case last year and asked for a retrial, after presenting new DNA evidence that they said vindicated him. The judges of France’s top appeals court have asked for further analysis of new evidence, in what Mr Raddad’s supporters hope is a first step towards a new trial.
But on Thursday, the court rejected the request.
Sylvie Noachovitch, Mr Raddad’s lawyer, told reporters at the court in Paris that she was “absolutely scandalized” and said she would appeal before the European Court of Human Rights.
Noachovitch said: “I will never abandon Omar Raddad. “My determination is even stronger, stronger than ever.”
Tributes are rare in France, and reburials where convictions have been overturned are even rarer. In 2002, a similar claim by Mr. Raddad, based on new testimony and previous DNA evidence, was Was rejected.
Ms. Marchal’s family has always held Mr. Raddad guilty and opposed a new trial. In a statement on Thursday by Sabine du Granrut, Mrs Marchal’s niece, the family said they hoped the decision would “put an end to a case they had so painfully experienced”.
“The family regrets that over the past 30 years this affair has been the subject of media hysteria,” the statement said.
At his 1994 trial, prosecutors said Mr. Raddad had a gambling problem and killed his employer in anger when she refused to advance his salary. Mr Raddad’s supporters argued that he got along well with Ms Marchal and had no reason to kill her.
Mr. Raddad was convicted and sentenced to 18 years in prison, although he was released after four years at the request of King Hassan II of Morocco, where the case was closely watched and by the French president at the time. now Jacques Chirac partial pardon. .
In 2015, advances in DNA technology placed the DNA of four unidentified men – none of whom were Mr. Raddad – at a crime scene, including one with mixed genetic traces. with the victim’s blood.
Raddad’s supporters say the new evidence will help identify the real killer. Ms. Marchal’s family countered that three decades ago, the evidence was handled improperly and that traces of DNA were contaminated from an unrelated source.
In Thursday’s ruling, the court said that the discovery of new DNA at the scene was insufficient to order a new trial. There is too much uncertainty about its origin, the court said, and it is impossible to determine when it was left there.
The newly discovered DNA by itself “is not sufficient to establish a connection between them and the case, as these traces may have been left before or after the murder,” the court wrote in its ruling.
Ms. Noachovitch, Mr. Raddad’s lawyer, countered that argument, arguing that the judges had overlooked a 2014 law that relaxed the criteria for a fugitive and new evidence, even if it hasn’t been possible so far. , there was enough doubt about Mr. Raddad’s conviction to justify. a new hearing.
