Verdict au procès de Cédric Jubillar, après quatre semaines de débats
Epilogue d’un procès hors normes, la cour d’assises du Tarn dira vendredi si Cédric Jubillar est coupable ou non du meurtre de son épouse Delphine, dont le corps n’a pas été retrouvé depuis fin 2020.Le ministère public a requis 30 ans de réclusion criminelle à son encontre, ses avocats réclament son acquittement. Vendredi, à l’ouverture de l’audience à Albi, le peintre-plaquiste de 38 ans, qui clame son innocence, aura une dernière opportunité de s’exprimer devant la cour. Les trois magistrats et les six jurés se retireront ensuite pour délibérer, avec pour consigne que le doute doit profiter à l’accusé. Sept sur neuf doivent déclarer Cédric Jubillar coupable, pour qu’il soit condamné. Si trois d’entre eux votent “non coupable”, il sera acquitté.- Semer le doute -Invariablement, l’accusé, stoïque dans son box mais régulièrement secoué de mouvements nerveux, a martelé qu’il n’avait rien à voir avec la disparition de la mère de ses deux enfants, dans la nuit du 15 au 16 décembre 2020 à Cagnac-les-Mines, près d’Albi. “Je conteste toujours les faits qui me sont reprochés”, a-t-il dit dès sa première prise de parole le 22 septembre, au premier jour du procès de quatre semaines. Et il n’aura pas dévié jusqu’à la fin.Lors de leurs plaidoiries, jeudi, ses avocats ont cherché à semer le doute dans l’esprit des jurés. Alors que parties civiles et avocats généraux estiment qu’un “pétage de plomb” de l’accusé a pu conduire au meurtre de l’infirmière de 33 ans, Emmanuelle Franck a affirmé: “Un pétage de plomb, c’est ce qu’on appelle un crime pulsionnel, un crime passionnel, celui qui laisse le plus de traces, parce qu’on ne contrôle rien, on éclabousse tout”. Or il n’y a aucune trace, a insisté l’avocate, adressant ses dernières salves aux enquêteurs et aux juges d’instruction.”Vous ne serez pas le jury du festival de Cannes qui vient récompenser le meilleur scenario”, a lancé aux jurés son confrère Alexandre Martin. Faute de preuves, les enquêteurs ont en effet, selon lui, imaginé “un faisceau d’indices” et bâti un scénario, qui vient conclure une instruction “à charge”.- Féminicide -Depuis le 16 décembre 2020, une “machine effrayante” s’est mise en marche, “quinze jours après la condamnation de Daval, cela ne peut être que le mari”, a fustigé Me Martin, en référence à la condamnation de Jonathann Daval pour un féminicide retentissant, jugé en novembre 2020.”La conviction des gendarmes dès le premier jour” a empêché la manifestation de la vérité et le procès, quatre ans et demi plus tard, n’a fait que dérouler un “tapis rouge à l’erreur judiciaire”, a-t-il plaidé.Pour les parties civiles et l’accusation, la culpabilité de Cédric Jubillar ne fait en revanche aucun doute. L’avocat général Pierre Aurignac a estimé que “pour défendre l’idée de l’innocence de M. Jubillar, il faut écarter quatre experts, faire taire 19 témoins et tuer le chien pisteur” qui a établi que la mère de famille n’a pas quitté son domicile la nuit de la disparition.”Le crime parfait attendra, a-t-il ajouté, le crime parfait, ce n’est pas le crime sans cadavre mais celui pour lequel on n’est pas condamné, et vous allez être condamné M. Jubillar”.Pour Me Laurent Boguet, avocat des enfants du couple, “il ne l’a pas seulement tuée, il l’a étranglée pour la faire taire, il l’a effacée en faisant disparaître le corps”.Pauline Rongier, avocate d’une amie de la disparue, a quant à elle demandé aux jurés de trouver le “courage” de condamner l’accusé malgré l’absence de corps. Dénigrement, “surveillance”, “violences sur les enfants”, elle décrit la “chape de plomb, la prison dans laquelle était Delphine”, ce “contrôle coercitif” qui, selon elle, précède la plupart des féminicides.Incarcéré en juin 2021, Cédric Jubillar est détenu à l’isolement à la prison de Seysses, près de Toulouse. Le prononcé de l’arrêt de la cour d’assises mettra fin aux quatre semaines de procès, au cours desquelles les jurés -deux femmes, quatre hommes- auront pu se forger une intime conviction.Quelle que soit la décision, elle fera l’objet d’un appel, ont fait savoir les parties. Et un nouveau procès se tiendra en 2026, probablement devant la cour d’appel de Toulouse.
Verdict au procès de Cédric Jubillar, après quatre semaines de débats
Epilogue d’un procès hors normes, la cour d’assises du Tarn dira vendredi si Cédric Jubillar est coupable ou non du meurtre de son épouse Delphine, dont le corps n’a pas été retrouvé depuis fin 2020.Le ministère public a requis 30 ans de réclusion criminelle à son encontre, ses avocats réclament son acquittement. Vendredi, à l’ouverture de l’audience à Albi, le peintre-plaquiste de 38 ans, qui clame son innocence, aura une dernière opportunité de s’exprimer devant la cour. Les trois magistrats et les six jurés se retireront ensuite pour délibérer, avec pour consigne que le doute doit profiter à l’accusé. Sept sur neuf doivent déclarer Cédric Jubillar coupable, pour qu’il soit condamné. Si trois d’entre eux votent “non coupable”, il sera acquitté.- Semer le doute -Invariablement, l’accusé, stoïque dans son box mais régulièrement secoué de mouvements nerveux, a martelé qu’il n’avait rien à voir avec la disparition de la mère de ses deux enfants, dans la nuit du 15 au 16 décembre 2020 à Cagnac-les-Mines, près d’Albi. “Je conteste toujours les faits qui me sont reprochés”, a-t-il dit dès sa première prise de parole le 22 septembre, au premier jour du procès de quatre semaines. Et il n’aura pas dévié jusqu’à la fin.Lors de leurs plaidoiries, jeudi, ses avocats ont cherché à semer le doute dans l’esprit des jurés. Alors que parties civiles et avocats généraux estiment qu’un “pétage de plomb” de l’accusé a pu conduire au meurtre de l’infirmière de 33 ans, Emmanuelle Franck a affirmé: “Un pétage de plomb, c’est ce qu’on appelle un crime pulsionnel, un crime passionnel, celui qui laisse le plus de traces, parce qu’on ne contrôle rien, on éclabousse tout”. Or il n’y a aucune trace, a insisté l’avocate, adressant ses dernières salves aux enquêteurs et aux juges d’instruction.”Vous ne serez pas le jury du festival de Cannes qui vient récompenser le meilleur scenario”, a lancé aux jurés son confrère Alexandre Martin. Faute de preuves, les enquêteurs ont en effet, selon lui, imaginé “un faisceau d’indices” et bâti un scénario, qui vient conclure une instruction “à charge”.- Féminicide -Depuis le 16 décembre 2020, une “machine effrayante” s’est mise en marche, “quinze jours après la condamnation de Daval, cela ne peut être que le mari”, a fustigé Me Martin, en référence à la condamnation de Jonathann Daval pour un féminicide retentissant, jugé en novembre 2020.”La conviction des gendarmes dès le premier jour” a empêché la manifestation de la vérité et le procès, quatre ans et demi plus tard, n’a fait que dérouler un “tapis rouge à l’erreur judiciaire”, a-t-il plaidé.Pour les parties civiles et l’accusation, la culpabilité de Cédric Jubillar ne fait en revanche aucun doute. L’avocat général Pierre Aurignac a estimé que “pour défendre l’idée de l’innocence de M. Jubillar, il faut écarter quatre experts, faire taire 19 témoins et tuer le chien pisteur” qui a établi que la mère de famille n’a pas quitté son domicile la nuit de la disparition.”Le crime parfait attendra, a-t-il ajouté, le crime parfait, ce n’est pas le crime sans cadavre mais celui pour lequel on n’est pas condamné, et vous allez être condamné M. Jubillar”.Pour Me Laurent Boguet, avocat des enfants du couple, “il ne l’a pas seulement tuée, il l’a étranglée pour la faire taire, il l’a effacée en faisant disparaître le corps”.Pauline Rongier, avocate d’une amie de la disparue, a quant à elle demandé aux jurés de trouver le “courage” de condamner l’accusé malgré l’absence de corps. Dénigrement, “surveillance”, “violences sur les enfants”, elle décrit la “chape de plomb, la prison dans laquelle était Delphine”, ce “contrôle coercitif” qui, selon elle, précède la plupart des féminicides.Incarcéré en juin 2021, Cédric Jubillar est détenu à l’isolement à la prison de Seysses, près de Toulouse. Le prononcé de l’arrêt de la cour d’assises mettra fin aux quatre semaines de procès, au cours desquelles les jurés -deux femmes, quatre hommes- auront pu se forger une intime conviction.Quelle que soit la décision, elle fera l’objet d’un appel, ont fait savoir les parties. Et un nouveau procès se tiendra en 2026, probablement devant la cour d’appel de Toulouse.
Senegal unveils report on WWII massacre by French colonial armyFri, 17 Oct 2025 01:38:04 GMT
Investigations into one of the worst massacres in France’s colonial history took a step forward on Thursday when researchers presented an official report to Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye.The document aims to clarify events in 1944 when the French colonial army in Senegal massacred African troops who had fought alongside them in World War II.Even …
After traveling alone to US, Guatemalan teens fear deportation
At age 15, I.B. fled poverty and a father who abused her in Guatemala. She emigrated without her parents to the United States — like hundreds of children Donald Trump’s administration recently tried to deport.Between October 2024 and August 2025, 28,867 unaccompanied minors entered the United States — a 70 percent drop from the previous period, according to US Customs and Border Patrol.Hundreds are Guatemalans from impoverished indigenous communities, as shown by court documents recently obtained by AFP.I.B. entered the United States in September 2024 and was sent to live with a foster family in Connecticut by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), a US government agency that handles cases of unaccompanied minors.”I had to leave Guatemala because of all my suffering there,” a court document quotes her as saying. “There were times when we had no food, and sometimes I had to eat food from dumpsters to survive.””My father was not part of my life since I was very young, and during one of the few times I saw him, he abused me,” she added.In August, immigration officers asked her if she had any family in her home country.”No one asked me if I was afraid to go back to Guatemala, which I am.”- ‘Get ready’ -I.B. is represented by the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), an NGO that blocked the deportation of 76 unaccompanied Guatemalan minors from an airport in Harlingen, Texas on August 31.Another minor referred to as F.O.Y.P. was in that group.”At about 1 o’clock in the morning, they arrived in my room and told me they were going to be transporting me out of the shelter. They gave me only about 20 to 30 minutes to get ready,” the 17-year-old said.It was not clear where he was being taken, but “finally, they told us that we were all going to be going back to Guatemala.”He was taken to an airport where a group of 76 teens waited for four hours on busses and four more in an airplane.Eventually they were taken off the plane and, according to court testimony, returned to shelters.Their deportation was blocked by a judge who issued an emergency injunction, saying it is illegal to deport unaccompanied children when an immigration judge has not ruled on their cases.In mid-September, a federal judge in Washington, Timothy Kelly, extended the block. The administration of President Donald Trump has yet to appeal. The halted deportation is a victory not only for the Guatemalan teens taken off the plane, but also for other unaccomanied minors “for whom the court also concluded that attempts to expel them without the protections of the law would likely be unlawful,” said Mary McCord of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University in Washington.According to the US government, 327 Guatemalan children older than 14 qualify to be returned to their country of origin under a bilateral accord. Guatemala’s government says the number is more than 600.- ‘I do not want to go back’ -The US Department of Homeland Security maintains the minors should be with their families, but Judge Kelly found that was not necessarily what the families wanted.”There is no evidence before the Court that the parents of these children sought their return,” Kelly wrote. “To the contrary, the Guatemalan Attorney General reports that officials could not even track down parents for most of the children whom Defendants found eligible for their reunification.”Guatemalan President Bernardo Arevalo said the decision to repatriate the minors was based on fears that once they turned 18 they could be removed from shelters and placed in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention centers.”We will be happy to accept any unaccompanied child who is able to return voluntarily or by court order,” he said.What do the kids themselves have to say?”Here in the US, I live with my foster family who treats me well and supports me…I do not want to go back to Guatemala,” I.B. said.Another teen, identified as M.A.L.R., said that on August 29 a judge informed her that her name was on a list of Guatemalan children who wanted to return home. But she did not.When she was taken from her foster family and put on a bus, she felt sick and feverish and almost vomited. M.A.L.R. fled Guatemala at age 15 after she and her family received death threats from a man whose advances she had rebuffed. B.M.R.P., her mother, said she had never been contacted by the government in Guatemala or the United States. “I also never told anyone I wanted M. to return. I think she is in danger if she does return to Guatemala,” court documents quote her as saying.”All I ask is that you help my daughter stay safe — help her stay safe by not returning her to Guatemala.”
Trump critic John Bolton indicted for mishandling classified info
John Bolton, Donald Trump’s former national security advisor, was indicted on Thursday — the third foe of the US president to be hit with criminal charges in recent weeks.The 76-year-old veteran diplomat was charged by a federal grand jury in Maryland with 18 counts of transmitting and retaining classified information.The 26-page indictment accuses Bolton of sharing top secret documents by email with two “unauthorized individuals” who are not identified but are believed to be his wife and daughter.It says he shared more than 1,000 pages of “diary-life” entries about his work as national security advisor via non-government email or a messaging app.The Justice Department said the documents “revealed intelligence about future attacks, foreign adversaries, and foreign-policy relations.”Each of the counts carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. “Anyone who abuses a position of power and jeopardizes our national security will be held accountable. No one is above the law,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement.In a statement to US media, Bolton refuted the charges and said he had “become the latest target in weaponizing the Justice Department… with charges that were declined before or distort the facts.”Asked for his reaction to Bolton’s indictment, Trump told reporters his former aide is a “bad guy” and “that’s the way it goes.”- Trump critics in legal jeopardy -Bolton’s indictment follows the filing of criminal charges by the Justice Department against two other prominent critics of the Republican president — New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI director James Comey.The 66-year-old James was indicted by a grand jury in Virginia on October 9 on charges of bank fraud and making false statements related to a property she purchased in 2020 in Norfolk, Virginia.James, who successfully prosecuted Trump for financial fraud, has rejected the charges as “baseless” and described them as “political retribution.”Comey, 64, pleaded not guilty on October 8 to charges of making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding.His lawyer has said he will seek to have the case thrown out on the grounds that it is a vindictive and selective prosecution.Trump recently publicly urged Bondi in a social media post to take action against James, Comey and others he sees as enemies, in an escalation of his campaign against political opponents.Trump did not specifically mention Bolton in the Truth Social post, but he has lashed out at his former advisor in the past and withdrew his security detail shortly after returning to the White House in January.- ‘Unfit to be president’ -A longtime critic of the Iranian regime, Bolton was a national security hawk and has received death threats from Tehran.As part of the investigation into Bolton, FBI agents raided his Maryland suburban home and his Washington office in August.Bolton served as Trump’s national security advisor in his first term and later angered the administration with the publication of a highly critical book, “The Room Where It Happened.”He has since become a highly visible and pugnacious detractor of Trump, frequently appearing on television news shows and in print to condemn the man he has called “unfit to be president.”Since January, Trump has taken a number of punitive measures against perceived enemies, purging government officials he deemed to be disloyal, targeting law firms involved in past cases against him and pulling federal funding from universities.After Trump left the White House in 2021, James brought a major civil fraud case against him, alleging he and his real estate company had inflated his wealth and manipulated the value of properties to obtain favorable bank loans or insurance terms.A New York state judge ordered Trump to pay $464 million, but a higher court removed the financial penalty while upholding the underlying judgment.The cases against James and Comey were filed by Trump’s handpicked US attorney, Lindsey Halligan, after the previous federal prosecutor resigned, saying there was not enough evidence to charge them.Appointed to head the Federal Bureau of Investigation by then-president Barack Obama in 2013, Comey was fired by Trump in 2017 amid the probe into whether any members of the Trump presidential campaign had colluded with Moscow to sway the 2016 election.Trump was accused of mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House and plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election.Neither case came to trial, and special counsel Jack Smith — in line with a Justice Department policy of not prosecuting a sitting president — dropped them both after Trump won the November 2024 presidential election.
NY mayoral hopefuls clash in high-stakes debate
A socialist, an accused molester and a vigilante all hoping to be New York’s next mayor clashed in a debate with “high levels of testosterone” Thursday as the unpredictable campaign enters the homestretch.Democratic candidate and frontrunner Zohran Mamdani, independent former New York governor Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa pitched to voters in the first of two televised debates ahead of the November 4 election. Early voting begins on October 25.Mamdani attacked Cuomo for his alleged sexual misconduct and controversial governing record “sending seniors to their death in nursing homes” during the Covid pandemic.”Thank God I’m not a professional politician because they have created the crime crisis in this city,” Sliwa said, gesturing at his two rivals.”There’s high levels of testosterone in this room,” he said later.Mamdani pulled off a stunning upset in the Democratic Party primary, defeating political scion Cuomo who had been the favorite for weeks, becoming the party’s official nominee.Mamdani has promised free bus services, rent freezes and city-run supermarkets, which Cuomo has panned as fanciful and unaffordable government overreach.The race to govern the city’s 8.5 million people was again upended when sitting Mayor Eric Adams, who has been engulfed in corruption allegations, quit the race without endorsing another candidate.Cuomo, 67, was the state governor from 2011 until 2021, when he resigned over sexual assault allegations.Mamdani, 33, is a state lawmaker for the city borough of Queens and has run an insurgent grass-roots campaign that has motivated young New Yorkers at a high rate.- ‘Take on Trump’ -Trump has threatened to withhold federal funds from Mamdani’s administration if he is elected, calling him a “communist.”But Mamdani said “I would make it clear to the president that I am willing to not only speak to him, but to work with him, if it means delivering on lowering the cost of living for New York.”Cuomo warned “Trump will take over New York City, and it will be Mayor Trump” if Mamdani won — mirroring the takeover of much of the administration of the capital Washington.Trump said Wednesday he had “terminated” the $16 billion Hudson Gateway tunnel linking New York to New Jersey, a years-long megaproject. Asked in the debate for his dream news headline, Mamdani said it would be “Mamdani continues to take on Trump.”Quinnipiac University polling suggests most voters will not have their minds changed by the TV debate with just 18 percent of Mamdani and Cuomo’s supporters “not likely” to alter their pick, compared to 24 percent of Sliwa’s backers.In the latest polling Sliwa, a 71-year-old who founded the Guardian Angels vigilante group in 1979, is trailing a distant third with 15 percent in the most recent poll, behind Cuomo’s 33 percent and Mamdani’s 46 percent.Sliwa insisted he would not bow to inducements he alleged were arranged by Cuomo — who denies the claim — to quit the race, like lucrative jobs with fat salaries and a driver.”I said, ‘Hey, this is not only unethical, it’s bribery, and it could be criminal,” Sliwa told AFP ahead of the showdown.One of the most acrimonious exchanges in the debate, held without an audience, centered on the safety of New York’s significant Jewish community.Cuomo accused Mamdani of not condemning Hamas and endorsing an epithet he claimed meant death to all Jews globally, while Sliwa accused both of being soft on hate crimes because of their endorsement of cash bail.”Why would (Mamdani) not condemn Hamas? He still won’t denounce ‘globalize the intifada,’ which means kill all Jews,” Cuomo said, drawing an instant rejection from Mamdani.Sliwa pointed to his leadership of a vigilante group saying he had “been there for all people at all times for 46 years as leader of the Guardian Angels here and around the world.”A second debate will be held on October 22.
Les grandes banques américaines ne sont plus tenues de jauger le risque climatique
Les grandes banques américaines ne sont plus tenues de porter une attention particulière aux risques liés au changement climatique qui pèsent sur leur activité, ont annoncé jeudi les agences de régulation des Etats-Unis, dont la Fed.”Bon débarras”, a commenté en deux mots un des responsables de la banque centrale des Etats-Unis, le gouverneur Christopher Waller, dans un communiqué.M. Waller est l’une des personnes pressenties pour prendre la tête de l’institution quand le mandat de Jerome Powell s’achèvera, au printemps prochain. Il doit pour cela être désigné par le président américain Donald Trump, climatosceptique assumé.En octobre 2023, une série de recommandations avaient été publiées pour que les banques se penchent sur les risques climatiques qui peuvent faire vaciller leur activité. La multiplication, par exemple, des incendies, inondations ou ouragans dévastateurs représentent un coût assurantiel élevé.Ces recommandations avaient été adressées aux banques ayant plus de 100 milliards de dollars d’actifs.- “Courte vue” -Les agences de régulation américaines “estiment que les principes de gestion des risques financiers liés au climat ne sont pas nécessaires, car les normes de sécurité et de robustesse existantes imposent à toutes les institutions supervisées de mettre en place une gestion des risques efficace, adaptée à leur taille, à leur complexité et à leurs activités”, selon leur communiqué commun.”En outre, toutes les institutions supervisées sont tenues d’examiner et de traiter de manière appropriée tous les risques financiers importants et doivent être résilientes face à toute une série de risques, y compris les risques émergents”, est-il ajouté. Dans le détail, au conseil des gouverneurs de la Fed, cinq membres ont voté pour le retrait des recommandations, une s’est abstenue (la gouverneure Lisa Cook) et un a voté contre. Il s’agit de Michael Barr, l’ancien vice-président de la Fed chargé de la régulation bancaire qui avait porté ce changement, et avait annoncé sa démission de ce poste quelques jours avant le retour au pouvoir de Donald Trump en janvier. Il est resté gouverneur.Dans un communiqué séparé, M. Barr a regretté une décision “de courte vue qui rendra le système financier plus risqué alors même que les risques financiers liés au climat augmentent”.Sa remplaçante, Michelle Bowman, avait fait part de ses fortes réserves.”Ces directives ont eu pour effet de semer la confusion quant aux attentes des autorités de surveillance et d’augmenter les coûts et les charges liés à la conformité, sans améliorer de manière proportionnelle la sécurité et la robustesse des institutions financières ni la stabilité financière des États-Unis”, a-t-elle soutenu dans son propre communiqué.