Very unusual cast for a trial against a background of shooting in the city center of Geneva. Two thugs, who came to rob a local jewelry store, share the dock with the guard who had launched after them. The exchange of 17 shots miraculously left no one injured, but all three are to be tried on charges of attempted murder and endangering the life of another. The main issue in this case, the fate that will be reserved for the security guard. The public prosecutor estimates that this burned head deserves 4 years of prison for having wanted to play cowboy. The defense pleads for a legitimate response to the danger. And the whole profession is waiting to know the judges’ verdict.
It all starts with robbery that has become almost incidental. Patrick *, a child from the suburbs of Lyon, admits it straight away. It was he who dragged Simon *, his lifelong friend, into this mess. As he had already drawn his little brother into one of the robberies which earned him to serve nine years of detention in France. He was on parole when he had the idea to attack this jewelry store on Quai des Bergues. President Alessandra Armati is surprised: “You have just gotten out of prison and, wham, do you start again?” The defendant explains: “We had debts with my partner. I weighed the pros and cons and made the wrong decision. “
Find all our articles on justice issues
The wig and the Magnum
Back to this Saturday morning in May 2017. The two accomplices, now 38, both fathers of family, present themselves at the jewelry store wearing make-up and disguised as women. Accomplices – whose names they refuse to reveal for fear of reprisals – keep watch. Patrick also got a Magnum 44, loaded with six expanding bullets, “just to impress.” The weapon has its effect. “I was liquefied,” recalls one employee. No one thought of resisting, the duo easily grabbed a booty valued at some 658,000 francs and took off.
This is where it all gets complicated. The guard, who is taking a break, learns that the alarm has gone off. He rushes over, sees the boss coming out, shouting “help, this is it” and running behind the robbers with another guard. The security guard does the same by taking a different path and catches up with the duo in the small street where the scooter is parked which must be used for their escape. “This western scene was played in a pocket handkerchief,” said prosecutor Laetitia Meier Droz. From there, the versions diverge.
Who was the first to shoot?
According to the thugs, the vigilante opened fire first. “I didn’t think he was going to shoot us. I crouched down behind the scooter and didn’t move, “recalls Simon. The security guard says otherwise, “I yelled at them to lie on the ground. The one with the gun turned around and shot me. So I said to myself, “But, it turned me on!” Anyone who has officiated for over twenty years as a reservist in the French gendarmerie still can’t believe it. “During these missions, I had often used criminals, but I had never been called upon to shoot. They usually lay down their arms in front of the police. ”
Nothing like it here. Patrick fired four times, while the vigil aligned 13 shots with his Glock. Both claim, however, that they never intended to hit the opponent. The thief claims to have aimed in the air. And the safety officer affirms – even if he felt in danger and therefore also legitimized to adjust in the target – to have shot three times in a “neutral zone”, then ten times to touch the scooter while shouting at them to be return. “It was like I didn’t exist. I may have pulled too much, but I wanted to stop it all. ” Finally, he manages to approach by holding their cheeks and overpowered one of the brigands with the help of a colleague. The other was arrested shortly after by the police.
“A vigilante”
Trained in shooting in order to benefit from his license to carry a weapon, the vigil has regularly passed all the tests. Out of the company’s 400 employees, the training manager ranks it “among the good”. At the witness stand, his supervisor did not have the stingy compliment. He portrays a collaborator “thoughtful, delicate, careful, very endearing” and says he is convinced that if the guard could have done otherwise, he would never have taken out this weapon.
Not enough to curb the ardor of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which accuses this security officer of having taken himself for “a vigilante” and of having made everything false. According to prosecutor Meier Droz, the guard should have entered the jewelry store and secure the premises. “He has taken over the police powers which he did not have and there is no room for self-defense in this context.” The prosecution does not believe for a second in warning shots and other deterrent bullet: “They target and shoot themselves, it is established by the ballistics report.” Clearly, everyone wanted to touch the other and accepted the possibility of killing.
“Stunned”
Meeting with Patrick and Simon (with a less busy judicial past), the prosecutor requested sentences of 8 and 6 years in prison as well as expulsion from the territory for a period of 10 years. She also called for a firm sentence and a 5-year expulsion from the security guard. This severity against the 54-year-old security guard was unanimous against her. Me Didier Bottge, on behalf of the owner and the employee of the jewelry store, said “dumbfounded”. In the Complainants’ view, “this guard only did his duty.”
Angry, Me Nicola Meier, the defender of the vigil, had harsh words for this indictment which puts the responsibility for the shooting on the back of his client. Between this security guard, who has never varied in his story, and these two delinquents who have been constantly adapting their version, the lawyer calls to give much more credibility to the former reservist several times decorated. Clearly, the vigil did not fire the first. He was there to protect his boss, everything went very quickly and he had good reasons to fear an imminent attack anyway. “We are in the middle of proportionate self-defense.”
Even on the side of the brigands, defended by Mes Dalmat Pira and Nicholas Antenen, there is no bitterness against the interventionism of the vigil. Patrick’s last words will be for him: “I sincerely hope that Mr. M. will not go to prison. I think he didn’t want to kill us, like I didn’t want to kill him. ”
* First names are fictitious
–
