By Isabelle John
Introduction
The intense time-consuming and controversial case on the murder of Marchal causes riot upon the possibility of a retrial. Omar Raddad, a Morrocan-born gardener was convicted for the murder of his wealthy boss occurring in 1991, more specifically June 23, 1991.
The facts of the case are that a widowed heiress of a car manufacturer, Ghislaine Marchal, was brutally murdered, allegedly by Raddad. The victim was found to be smothered in blood in the cellar of her property in Mougins, in the South of France.[1]
Evidence found at the scene of crime included two inscriptions on two doors, the victim’s blood used as the art medium. The phrases inscribed were as follows: “Omar m’a tuer” and “Omar m’a t”, meaning “Omar killed me”. This was considered sufficient evidence and Raddad was arrested.[2] On February 2, 1994, Raddad was sentenced to 18 years in prison.
Evidential Aspect
These famous inscriptions set in motion a multitude of questions that were raised with the evidence submitted and the scrutiny that it went under. Some of the questions raised were:
- How could a woman stabbed 16 times, drag herself and write on the wall?
Raddad in a 2010 interview with the French weekly Journal du Dimanche[3] said:
“How an elderly woman, knocked out and gravely injured with 16 stab wounds, could drag herself from one end of the room to the other to write, ‘Omar killed me’ – twice – is something I’ve tried to visualize in my prison cell a thousand times in the dark. It’s impossible!” There was also skepticism on the prosecution’s weak claim of motive, based on an argument that occurred between Marchal and Raddad over a modest amount of money of 2000 francs.
- Why did Judge Renard retire and how is that connected to the Raddad case?
In an interview conducted with Journal du Dimanche, Raddad mentioned that there was tampering of evidence involved with the case. Initially, the forensic scientists had established that the date of Marchal’s death was January 24th. Raddad was in Toulon that day and would have had an alibi.
However, Judge Renard called the doctors and had urged them to detail that the death had occurred on the 23rd. This intervention was confirmed on a documentary that was made on the case.
As a result of breach of forgery, professional secrecy, and use of forgery (apparent in another case), Judge Renard retired in the year 2005.[4]
- How could Marchal, a wealthy and literate individual, use improper grammar?
France is a country that is comparatively obsessed with the proper use of the French language, more specifically grammar. The incorrect use of grammar in the inscription was the subject of meticulous scrutiny.
As Marchal was an heiress, wealthy and well-educated, it raised fierce debates on whether she would write “Omar m’a tuer” using the infinitive tense instead of the right way, which was the use of the past tense, “Omar m’a tué.”
The Presidential Pardon
As per justice stands in the eyes of the French public, Raddad, who has continuously declared his innocence, remains guilty to date, of Marchal’s murder, even following the presidential pardon he received in 1996 by Jacques Chirac, the French President.
Raddad was released from prison in 1998, however has continued to mention that a presidential pardon does not prove innocence, and to quote Raddad: “I was pardoned. I was not cleared. I want to clear my name,” he told reporters when the 2011 film, “Omar m’a tuer,” was released.[5]
The presidential pardon that was received by Raddad in the year 1996 was a result of pressure that was placed on Chirac by Morocco’s King, Hassan II.
Raddad – his Character and the Racial Injustice
Raddad was described to be an upright family man with a slight weakness for casinos and slot-machines. Raddad’s wife mentioned that her husband was incapable of harming a fly, let alone murder someone and the president judge countered: “Yes, but that doesn’t prevent him from knowing how to slit the throat of a sheep,” recalled a layer Najwa El Haïté, furing an interview with FRANCE 24.[6]
This was an evident reference to the killing of an animal for food that occurred during the well-known Muslim festival Eid al-Adha. Haïté explained that “This was a terrible statement. It targeted Muslims by making them look like potential murders,”. As the aggressive statement in question was made by a judge, Armand Dijan the presiding judge nonetheless, it came under quite an intense level of scrutiny.
This raised questions on injustice and many individuals started viewing the gardener’s conviction as a symbol of the discrimination and injustice that is seen to be suffered by immigrants in France.
The case itself in the beginning shook France to its core and it caused the resurfacing of tense questions raised on the topics of race, anti-immigrant bias, and justice.
It quickly took on a sociopolitical dimension which then put two diametrically contrasting worlds against each other. A wealthy family from the Côte d’Azur and a Moroccan Muslim immigrant who spoke broken French.
When Raddad was sentenced to his 18 years in prison, his lawyer, Jacques Vergès generated turmoil by comparing his client, Raddad’s, case to the Dreyfus affair. The Dreyfus affair was where a Jewish army captain was accused of spying for Germany when they were going through a duration of intensified anti-Semitic sentimentality in France. To quote Vergès:
“A hundred years ago, an officer was condemned because he was Jewish, today a gardener is condemned because he is North African.”
The Retrial
An expert analysis that was conducted in 2019 was revealed on Monday, the 21st of June by Le Monde, the leading French daily.[7] The expert discovered approximately 30 complete male DNA traces that did not originate from Raddad and that was also found in one of the bloody inscriptions at the scene of the crime.
Other traces of DNA that did not match Raddad had previously been found at the crime scene. However, when this was brought to the appeals court in 2002 it was refused.
Subsequently as the years have passed, a law was passed in 2014 which relaxed the conditions for a criminal review. This has then allowed for new investigations to occur in more recent years.
This is what enabled Raddad’s lawyers to file a request for retrial, on the 24th of June. Haïté is quite optimistic about the likelihood of a new trial and to quote her: “There are new elements that should allow for a referral to the appeals court.”[8]
Looking at the data however, reviews of criminal convictions are relatively rare in France. Only around 10 defendants have been rewarded from a review and been acquitted by a retrial since 1945. Nevertheless, it is worth a try.
In an interview conducted by RTL the French radio station, with Raddad’s lawyer, Vergès, explained that Raddad, now 59 years old, was never able to regain the life he lived prior to his conviction and the whole incident going down.
However, in the light of new evidence being brough up in addition to the 2014 law, he has repossessed some hope after his period of depression. 30 years, for 30 years he has been waiting for this criminal review. That is all his life boiled down to, some hope that he would be acquitted.
Injustice? Bias? What is the Actual Truth?
The whole situation calls to question the injustice, the bias, and the fairness of the justice system. Raddad was convicted principally with the evidence consisting of the inscriptions and that there was a minor argument that took place between him and Marchal. There was clearly racist and religious discrimination that occurred in the court of law.
Yes, he was sentenced to 18 years in prison and got out of prison within 3 years, however he is still portrayed as guilty. He still has a criminal record and as mentioned before can never recover from this incident.
As the saying goes, innocent until proven guilty. There was not much proof present against Raddad during this case, was there? Especially when there was evidence that DNA that was not Raddad’s resurfaced a few years after, and the retrial was still not approved. Seems to be a lack of due diligence with this case.
People’s lives are constantly being destroyed because of an unfair or biased trial. Raddad’s case is just one example, but it is not the only one.
The scrutiny and the awareness that his case is receiving aids Raddad as things are always being discovered. More evidence needs to be scrutinized and it needs to be done fairly.
Conclusion
Raddad may be guilty, or he may be innocent. The only way of knowing is if he is awarded a fair trial. The uproar that was caused because of this case was not because of the outcome of the case. It was caused because of the way he was treated and of the way the decision was held.
The possibility of the retrial will most definitely raise questions and cause more turmoil. Maybe even more than was present before as the global world continues to progress and become more inclusive and speak out on a greater level.
- Possible retrial of high-profile murder case re-opens old wounds in France, available at: france24.com (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Possible retrial of high-profile murder case re-opens old wounds in France, available at: france24.com (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Journal du Dimanche, available at: lejdd.fr/Societe. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Journal du Dimanche, available at: lejdd.fr. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Possible retrial of high-profile murder case re-opens old wounds in France, available at: france24.com. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Possible retrial of high-profile murder case re-opens old wounds in France, available at: france24.com. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- The Omar Raddad affair, an endless investigation that still divides, available at: lemonde.fr. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑
- Possible retrial of high-profile murder case re-opens old wounds in France, available at: france24.com. (last visited on June 30, 2021). ↑