'It's okay — the few times I've been there it's not been that crowded. But if you feel uncomfortable, they have a large car park in front. We can stay there. When you see my car, come over and get in.'
They arranged to meet the following Saturday at 6.15 pm.
The three judges filed in: the presiding judge in a red robe and the two assessing judges in black robes who took up seats each side of him, the 'pots de fleurs'. The nine jurors were then chosen by picking names out of a pot of thirty-five by the presiding judge, Herve Griervaut and his greffier. The nine selected took their seats flanking the judges.
Molet had advised Machanaud of his right to challenge up to five jurors, but cautioned that often it aggravated and unsettled the rest of the jury. The defence made no challenges, the prosecution made only one: Perrimond singled out an old man in a crumpled suit and beret. Looked like a farm worker out for the day, thought Molet. Perrimond probably feared he might identify too readily with Machanaud. A replacement juror was picked out of the pot.
Machanaud was first on the stand. He was asked by Judge Griervaut to first of all provide an account of his activities on the day in question, then was questioned by Griervaut on specific points. This was mainly for clarification rather than angled at areas which might cast suspicion. That would come later with Perrimond, thought Molet. For now Griervaut was merely setting the scene for himself and the jury. The only contentious point he raised was Machanaud lying in earlier statements, confirming if Machanaud considered his final statement and later testimony at instruction to be correct. Hesitant 'Yes.'
Perrimond was next. He made much of the earlier lies and changes in police statements, sewing a strong opening image in the jury's mind of Machanaud desperately lying to cover up his dark deeds that day. He then focused on Machanaud's claim of not seeing the boy or seeing or hearing an attack, confronting him with the earlier police instruction entry that 'the boy was not seen at any time in the town centre, so must have reached the river by crossing the fields behind.'
Molet cringed as Perrimond took Machanaud through each stage of the gendarme's position at the reconstuction. Molet tapped his fingers impatiently to each reluctant 'yes' to twenty metres back, forty… sixty.
'So you saw absolutely nothing, Mr Machanaud,' Perrimond concluded. 'A boy was attacked and killed not yards away, and you had a clear view of the only point where he could have crossed the river. And yet you saw nothing?'
Perrimond kept Machanaud on the stand for another thirty minutes, ripping apart his earlier statements, magnifying the inconsistencies, and planting clearly in the jury's mind that not only was Machanaud at the scene of the crime, but it was stretching credulity that anyone else could have possibly been there. Machanaud would have seen them. Perrimond closed with the equipment that Machanaud used when fishing. 'Apart from your rod and bait — you had a bucket with water for the fish, and what else?'
'Some waders if I have to walk into the shallows.'
'Anything else? Any other sort of plastic protective clothing?'
'Oh yes, a plastic front apron to go over my shirt or overalls.'
'And what is that for?'
'If I have to gut any fish, it stops the blood getting on my clothing.'
Perrimond passed the floor. 'Thank you.'
A more complete legal bombardment Molet had hardly witnessed. Machanaud was clearly rattled, his few weak protests and arguments laying in tatters. But Molet wondered why Perrimond had finished with details of Machanaud's fishing equipment; surely a stronger image to close on would have been Machanaud standing in clear sight of where it was suggested the attack took place.
'Monsieur Fornier, when you realized that the car description given to Briant was different to the one mentioned to you, were you surprised?'
'I don't know. I didn't really think about it.'
Molet looked down thoughtfully. The first hour after recess had been taken up with police testimony, dominated by Perrimond asking Poullain carefully weighted questions to support his earlier arguments.
Molet had gone over the same points with Poullain for almost twenty minutes without finding a significant flaw to build on — then came to Machanaud's car statements and the later changes. After a gruelling quick fire session, Poullain finally conceded that it was incorrect of him not to have passed on the changed statement to instruction, then added hastily '… But as the investigating officer it is my duty to enter the information that I trust the most and feel is accurate.' All early advantages were lost.
Molet had dismissed him shortly after and called Dominic Fornier. After the first few minutes with Fornier, he had the feeling Fornier was more nervous about the car incident, might be easier to crack than Poullain — if he knew anything.
'When Machanaud mentioned changing his car statement to you in the bar that evening- you apparently showed surprise. Is that correct?'
'Yes.'
'So that was the first time that you had heard about the change in car description?'
'Yes, it was.'
'Quite a few surprises and changes that evening, it seems,' Molet commented cynically. Perrimond looked as if he was about to object, then changed his mind. 'As the assistant investigating officer, would it not be normal for you to be advised of such a change in statement the moment it was made?'
Dominic's hands sweated profusely on the lectern. His chest felt tight, constricted. 'No, not necessarily.'
'So tell me — what would the circumstances be under which you might not be informed?'
'As perhaps in this case, where my commanding officer has already determined the information was false.'
'And when did he share this information with you?'
'A day or so later perhaps.'
'Was that the reason for him not entering the change in the file?'
Dominic was sure his face looked flushed as the blood rushed to his head. He glanced across briefly at Machanaud, but his mother's image was stronger… reaching out to him. Poullain and him being questioned, charged with perjury for their earlier false statements. What price for Machanaud's life? He just couldn't lie! But in the end, as the images receded and he saw Molet staring concernedly and about to prompt, he did the next best thing and only told half the truth. 'Yes, it was — from what he told me later.'
Molet looked down at his file and flicked back a page.
If he just asked one more question, thought Dominic: 'Was that the only reason?' He was sure in that moment he would have told him everything, told him about Duclos and the call from Marcel Vallon relayed through Perrimond, the pressure from Poullain to cover up — the whole sorry mess that would probably ruin his career along with Poullain's, yet might at least save Machanaud's neck. And he realized then that he was almost willing it, hoping that Molet would look up and ask the question.
But Molet nodded to the bench and resumed his seat while Griervaut dismissed Fornier. Molet was still thoughtful. There had been a glimmer of recognition in Fornier's eye, almost a look of apology as he'd glanced towards Machanaud. But then just as quickly it was gone. What was it that Fornier knew? The thought preyed on his mind for a while afterwards, through the remainder of the police testimony and the start of forensic evidence.
When Perrimond came onto the gap between the two attacks estimated at forty minutes and Dubrulle pointed out that this had been determined mostly by the hospital medical examiner, not forensics — Perrimond ended the session abruptly.
Molet noted that Perrimond's questioning of Dubrulle, head of the Marseille forensics team, was scant, but put this down to the fact that Griervaut had already covered most of the key points.