Gisele Pelicot awarded France's Legion of Honour
She attended almost every day of the trial, which ended last December with Dominique Pelicot, 72, being given a maximum 20 years in jail for aggravated rape, after confessing to drugging her and recruiting around 50 men to rape her while she lay comatose in bed."I want all women who have been raped to say: Madame Pelicot did it, I can too," Pelicot previously told reporters, adding that she wanted to make "shame swap sides" from the victim to the rapist.French President Emmanuel Macron has publicly paid tribute to Pelicot as a trailblazer, adding that her "dignity and courage moved and inspired France and the world".According to her lawyer, a memoir detailing Gisèle Pelicot's story in her own words will be published early next year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Judge orders Kilmar Abrego Garcia's release from jail as ICE blocked from immediately deporting him
The federal judge overseeing Kilmar Abrego Garcia's criminal case on smuggling charges has ordered his release from jail before trial, finding that prosecutors failed to show 'any evidence' that his history or arguments against him warrant his ongoing detention. That order arrived moments after another federal judge overseeing his wrongful deportation case blocked Donald Trump's administration from immediately arresting and deporting him following his release from jail. Federal prosecutors have sought to bring his criminal case to trial as soon as possible. But immigration officials had told the court they intend to arrest and deport him before a trial even begins. Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty, and a trial is set to begin January 27, 2026. The judge referred conditions of his release to a magistrate judge overseeing the case. The Trump administration spent weeks insisting Abrego Garcia would never be allowed back to the country after admitting he was wrongfully deported to a Salvadoran prison in March. Yet he was abruptly flown back to the United States last month to face a criminal indictment in Tennessee. In recent court hearings in two different states, lawyers for the Department of Justice said they would only move forward with his criminal prosecution if he remains in custody while awaiting trial. On Wednesday, Tennessee District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw said the government 'fails to show by a preponderance of the evidence — let alone clear and convincing evidence — that Abrego is such a danger to others or the community that such concerns cannot be mitigated by conditions of release.' 'At bottom,' the judge wrote, 'the Government fails to provide any evidence that there is something in Abrego's history, or his exhibited characteristics, that warrants detention.' Maryland District Judge Paula Xinis, meanwhile, has blocked Immigration and Customs Enforcement from immediately detaining Abrego Garcia, if he is released from federal custody. She also ordered ICE to give him 72 hours' notice if officials decide to deport Abrego Garcia to a so-called 'third country,' or anywhere other than his native El Salvador. The administration has 'done little to assure the Court that absent intervention, Abrego Garcia's due process rights will be protected,' she wrote.
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Iraqi who argued he cannot be deported because he is divorced, wins appeal after legal error
An Iraqi who entered the UK illegally has won an appeal after arguing he cannot be deported because he is divorced. In claims disputed by the Home Office, he said he divorced a 'prominent' politician's daughter and brought 'dishonour' upon their family. The Iraqi said it would breach his human rights to send him back to Iraq because he was at risk of an 'honour feud'. The Iraqi, who was granted anonymity, has won an appeal at an upper immigration tribunal for his case to be reheard after it was initially rejected by the Home Office and lower court. The Iraqi entered Britain 'clandestinely' in 2020 after travelling through Turkey and across Europe before arriving by boat in the UK. He submitted his application for asylum the following day. The court was told that his 'claim for asylum is based upon a claimed risk of being a victim of an honour-based crime'. 'He alleges that he fled Iraq due to threats from his former father-in-law, a prominent and influential politician affiliated with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. 'According to the [Iraqi], he was accused of bringing dishonour upon [his ex-father-in-law's] family by divorcing his daughter,' the court was told. It was accepted that he was married and went through a divorce, but the Home Office 'did not accept that he had experienced problems from his ex-father-in-law'. The Home Office issued a deportation order but the Iraqi, who had a child with his ex-wife, appealed the decision. His challenge was dismissed by a lower tribunal as the judge questioned 'the credibility of the marriage itself'. The First-tier Tribunal said there was a 'disparity in social status' between his ex-wife – the daughter of a powerful politician – and him, a 'minimally educated taxi driver from a marginalised tribe'. A claim by the Iraqi that he had also been the victim of a 'violent' attack linked to the honour feud and stabbed 17 times was dismissed as implausible by the judge, partly because it was 'unsubstantiated' by any medical evidence. The judge said the asylum claim appeared a 'complete fabrication'. The Iraqi appealed to the upper tribunal where the judge Sara Anzani said the lower court was wrong to question the marriage and divorce certificates and said the Iraqi was not given a chance to respond to their doubts. Judge Anzani said: 'These concerns about the reliability and authenticity of the marriage and divorce certificates were not previously raised by the [Home Office], nor were they put to the [Iraqi] during the hearing. 'I find that the Judge's failure to raise his concerns about the authenticity and reliability of the marriage and divorce certificates, concerns not previously identified by the [Home Office], deprived the [Iraqi] of a fair opportunity to address the Judge's doubts. 'The Judge's findings on the marriage and divorce certificates contribute to his overall assessment of the [Iraqi's] credibility, and the ultimate finding that [his] claim was fabricated. 'Consequently, this procedural error is material and permeates the entirety of the Judge's decision'. Judge Anzani concluded that the case must be heard afresh at the First-tier Tribunal again, but not by the previous judge.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Cleared City traders hit out at rate-rigging prosecutions and treatment
The city traders wrongfully convicted in the aftermath of the financial crisis have spoken out about their decade- long battle for justice, claiming they were scapegoats. Tom Hayes was the first of nine traders to prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Office. In 2012, he was accused of rigging Libor - an interest rate on loans and financial contracts that was used throughout the financial system. The rate was determined daily based on submissions from several large banks. Mr Hayes was originally sentenced to 14 years in jail, one of the toughest sentences ever handed out for white collar crime. He served more than five years in prison, including the high security prison Belmarsh. Speaking to Sky News today after the Supreme Court overturned the conviction, Mr Hayes said: "I came out (of prison) to a son who was nine years old who I left when he was three. My marriage broke down whilst I was in prison. My mental health broke down while I was in prison." 1:05 Mr Hayes said he was made responsible for damage caused by the financial crisis. " There was this zeitgeist that existed where they wanted to send bankers to prison... We were unlucky". he said. He was joined by Carlo Palombo, who was convicted in 2019 for rigging Euribor, the Euro Libor rate. Mr Palombo said he spent most of his days in a small cell that he shared with another inmate at Wandsworth Prison. "There's violence everywhere. (We were) being treated like wild beasts by prison guards", he said. He said he was the victim of a "purge" by banks and regulators as they sought to absolve themselves of the consequences of the crash. "The stuff of which I was accused and convicted was something that was done completely openly by absolutely every single person… it was just a normal business practice of the bank", he said. Supreme Court judges said the two men did not receive fair trials because the juries were misdirected in the original cases. Essentially, they had been told their behaviour was dishonest without reaching that conclusion themselves. Both men are now trying to move on with their lives. Mr Hayes said he wanted to move to the sea and rebuild his family.
