Gérard Depardieu found guilty of sexually assaulting two women
Gérard Depardieu has been convicted of sexually assaulting two women and sentenced to an 18-month suspended prison term in the highest-profile case involving abuse in the French film industry.
The 76-year-old actor was not in the Paris court to hear Thierry Donard, the presiding judge, deliver the verdict.
Donard said the actor clearly did not understand the meaning of consent. His two accusers — an assistant director, 34, named only as 'Sarah', and a set decorator, 54, named as 'Amélie', on the film Les Volets Verts (The Green Shutters) — said they were relieved.
The court also fined Depardieu — a giant of the late 20th-century cinema known for films including Cyrano de Bergerac and Green Card — €29,040 for the offences and
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
3 hours ago
- Sky News
'He was going to kill me': More strangulation cases recorded by police but many investigations falter
Around 70% of non-fatal strangulation cases in the last year have been dropped due to evidential issues, exclusive data shared with Sky News shows. It is now three years since it became a standalone offence in England and Wales, in a landmark piece of legislation designed to protect domestic abuse victims. Data from the Institute for Addressing Strangulation (IFAS) shows that police are implementing the offence widely - but outcomes for victims are mixed. Warning: This article contains references to domestic abuse and sexual assault 'Sarah' - whose name has been changed to protect her identity - vividly remembers the first time her ex-partner strangled her, one year into their relationship. She said: "He was drunk, and he climbed on top me. He put his hands around my throat, and he pinned me down with the strength of his body." Terrified, she begged him repeatedly to stop, but he carried on. "I remember I just felt really numb and scared, but it was weird, it felt like an out-of-body experience." Afterwards the only words he spoke to her were 'look what you made me do', she said, and then when the ordeal was over, he carried on with his day as if nothing had happened. This was the beginning of a pattern of abuse that continued throughout the rest of their relationship, happening on at least 30 more occasions, Sarah estimated. It became so normalised He strangled her when she was pregnant. He strangled her whether her children were in the house or not. It always happened during sex, though Sarah was only later able to recognise that this was rape after talking to the police, because for her it had become so normalised. And, always, he told Sarah it was her fault - that she had somehow 'made' him do it. She later went on to suffer a miscarriage because of the physical abuse. 'A form of control' "Looking back now I can see it was a form of control. He got off on knowing that he was in control, and he liked seeing me upset," she said. "I thought that he was going to kill me because he used to threaten it to me. It was very, very scary." This fear of death is common among victims of strangulation and is a recognised tool of control and intimidation. A US study found that victims of domestic abuse were seven times more likely to be murdered by their current or former partner if there had been an incident of non-fatal strangulation beforehand. But this form of violence often leaves no obvious external signs of injury, meaning in some cases perpetrators could only be investigated for less serious offences like common assault, which did not reflect the severity of the crime. What are the possible effects on health? The potential health impacts are wide-ranging, including loss of consciousness, voice changes, difficulty in swallowing and breathing, bruising, haemorrhages, headaches, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), miscarriage, risk of suicide, and death (including delayed death). Symptoms can arise weeks or months after the event. It is for these reasons that campaigners fought for the introduction of the standalone offence, which came into effect in June 2022. 'Much work to be done' The IFAS has been monitoring the offence since the legislation was introduced and shared its latest report findings exclusively with Sky News. It said there is still "much work to be done" to better protect victims of strangulation. New figures obtained by IFAS from the Home Office reveal that over 63,000 crimes of non-fatal strangulation or suffocation were recorded by police in England and Wales in the first two years under the legislation. There were 39,360 recorded crimes in 2023/24, on average 66 offences per 100,000 people compared with 50 per 100,000 the year before, an increase of 20%. "Survivors who work with us have recognised time and time again how important it is to be able to see strangulation as a standalone offence and have the opportunity to progress with criminal justice proceedings," Harriet Smailes, co-author of the report, told Sky News. The volume of crimes recorded suggests that the offence is being widely recognised and reported by police - and the number resulting in charges, at 12%, is high compared to some other offences. However, a significant number of investigations result in no further action due to evidential difficulties. This can happen if police or prosecutors do not believe there is enough evidence to proceed, or if the victim does not support the investigation. This was the outcome in three in five investigations overall, including one in five investigations where the victim did support police action. Outcomes were similar in both years of available data. "In around half of cases, there are no external, physical, visible signs of injury. That's not to say that there aren't internal injuries that can't be seen just with the naked eye," said Ms Smailes, who is a research officer at IFAS. "It might be that that visible injury isn't present at the time of evidence capture that might develop over time, or because there's a difference in how individuals show bruising, for example those of different skin tones. That can contribute towards there not being enough perceived evidence to be able to progress with a police case," she said. In some cases where a victim disengages from police proceedings, it may be that they did not feel supported and believed in the process or felt that there were "too many obstacles". On the other hand, not all cases where a victim did not support police action are necessarily negative. "It might be that initial needs have been met in that instance through reporting to the police, for example, initial containment of the risk of that situation, and referrals to specialist health or mental health services," Ms Smailes explained. Police 'determined' to improve Assistant Commissioner Louisa Rolfe is the National Police Chiefs' Council lead for domestic abuse. She told Sky News that securing prosecutions for strangulation is a priority for tackling violence against women and girls, and a key part of national Domestic Abuse Matters training. "For us to do well in prosecutions, we need to understand how perpetrators operate, how they use this is a sinister way of controlling their victims. And we also know that many victims are frightened to pursue prosecution," she said. Investigators not only have to secure detailed evidence rapidly but also present the best possible case so that prosecutors and juries understand how an abuser is operating, she said. "That can be a challenging job, for a police service that's under pressure, trying to deal with a myriad of priorities. I know many investigators are passionate about getting this right." "We know we're up against it when it comes to securing convictions, but we're determined to improve," she added. Fewer than half were convicted Separate research by IFAS has found that in the first year under the new legislation, only around half of the number of offences charged by police were prosecuted, and less than half of those secured a conviction. Overall, 47% of the 1,437 prosecutions of non-fatal strangulation and suffocation offences in the year to June 2023 resulted in conviction, based on data from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) from all courts in England and Wales. There are several potential reasons that a prosecution may be unsuccessful, including evidential difficulties or a victim withdrawing from the process. The accused may also have been convicted of a separate offence, but not for the strangulation. Without more detailed data, it is hard to determine to what extent each is contributing to the low conviction rate. Reflecting on the figures, head of policy and public affairs at domestic abuse support charity Refuge, Ellie Butt, told Sky News that victims often face "huge pressure" from perpetrators to drop out of the criminal justice process. "When compounded with lengthy court delays and insufficient support, many survivors are forced to withdraw from the process. Police and prosecutors should be working to build cases that can be taken forward even when a survivor can no longer continue," she said. The Crown Prosecution Service highlighted to Sky News that the number of new prosecution proceedings has been consistently increasing, particularly domestic abuse-related strangulation offences. In the latest quarter, 2,000 cases reached their first hearing at magistrates' court. Kate Brown, the CPS national lead for domestic abuse, said: "Three years on, we have continued to bring more charges quarter on quarter, with over 2,000 seen in court in the past three months. "This standalone offence has shone a light on those who seek to use these violent acts to exert power over another person and harm them. We are determined to continue bringing abusers to justice for victims." A gendered crime The new data from IFAS reinforces that strangulation is a gendered crime. Around 80% of victims whose gender was recorded by police were female, while 88% of suspects were male. The data also shows that while people from all ages are impacted, most victims are younger, with three in five aged 34 or under. The age profile of suspects was slightly higher, with three in five suspects aged between 25 and 44. 'I want to say it's not your fault' Sarah's case ended in evidential difficulties. Though her case was reported before 2022, when strangulation became a specific offence, she said she did provide substantial physical evidence to the police and she feels "let down" by the justice system. She said she has been diagnosed with PTSD, anxiety and other health issues. "I live with it every day. It can be a song that comes on the radio or a sign or somebody's name and it would just bring everything back to me to that point, that moment," she said. "I want to say it's not your fault. Nobody has the right to control you, nobody has the right to abuse you, rape you, strangle you. "I would urge anyone to speak out and if you feel like you haven't been heard and your voice has not been listened to, speak out again."
The Review Geek
3 hours ago
- The Review Geek
K.O. (2025) Ending Explained – Does Leo survive the gang?
K.O. Plot Summary The premise of K.O. clings to all the usual tropes you'd expect from a flick like this, jumping straight into the action. Here, we follow aspiring MMA fighter Bastien, who finds himself in the ring with his bitter rival, Enzo. The pair go toe-to-toe in a relentless and pretty brutal sequence that immediately sets the tone and mood for the rest of the movie. Bastien's fight ends in tragedy when he counters a triangle hold into a full-on slam to the mat. Enzo's head crunches against the canvas, and unfortunately, he passes away as a result. Guilt-stricken, Bastien hangs up his gloves and disappears into exile. Fast-forward two years, and our reclusive hero is called back into action by Enzo's widowed wife, Emma. Her son, Leo, has gone missing after getting mixed up in the drug trade, and it seems he may be the target of some particularly nasty gangsters. With a bullseye on his back, Leo is in big trouble—and Bastien feels a moral obligation to do right by Emma. Who are the rival gang? Bastien heads off to find out the truth about Leo's whereabouts, where he winds up indirectly working with Captain Alaoui. The rival gang are called the Manchours. They're vicious and a lot of people are scared of them. They're fronted by a man named Abdul, a relentless gangster determined to grow his empire in Marseille – no matter the cost. Alaoui loses her badge thanks to getting too aggressive with a couple of gang members outside. She teams up with Bastien to get info on Leo's whereabouts, and they soon realize that he has valuable intel that could take down the Manchours. This explains why the gang are so interested in the kid – and why they want him dead. What is driving Alaoui and Bastien to fight so hard? Alaoui lives alone and doesn't have a partner. She's consumed by her grief though, still torn up over the passing of her brother. She has a history with the Manchours, stemming from her childhood. She grew up in the same neighbourhood as the gang and her brother began working with kids on the street. Unfortunately, when the Manchours started dealing drugs and getting the kids involved, her brother pissed them off badly. In fact, one night they tied him to a chair and burned him alive. Even worse, they sent the video to Alaoui and disappeared, until a year ago when they returned. They're smart and always one step ahead, building a criminal enterprise in Marseille – which Alaoui is determined to stop. What happens at the police station? After reuniting with Leo and a tense chase sequence at the apartment complex, the group make it back to the police station where Bastien explains why he's doing all of this. His father passed away when he was a kid and since then he was angry at the world and lashed out. Bastien chose fighting as an outlet and the irony is, this accident has caused Leo's father, Enzo, to die. He recognizes that Leo is going down a dark path and although Bastien didn't mean to kill the fighter, he feels responsible for making sure he steers the kid in the right direction. Bastien was lucky, having surrounded himself with good people and managing to turn a corner, away from a potential life of misery and crime. Who is the mole? Leo reveals in his police interview that the Manchours organized a big meeting with their contacts. Leo was new and shouldn't have been there but he showed up anyway. Here, the Manchour gang met with Andalou and his gang – the same guy we saw earlier tortured for the whereabouts of the drugs earlier in the movie. This was all a trap, organized by Andalou's contact. Leo saw Abdel Manchour kill a man right in front of him but unfortunately, was spotted spying on them and he decided to run. Leo got freaked when he saw the cops because that informant working with the gang happens to be 'The Cop'. It's here where Alaoui realizes there's mole in the midst… and it happens to be Vasseur. He immediately stabs Benoit in the neck before he's shot down. This explains why Leo never went to the police – he didn't trust them. Who survives the final fight? Outside, shots are fired at Sebastopol and the surrounding areas, sending officers out to check. Unfortunately, this leaves the station severely lacking in staff, prompting the Manchour gang to come in all guns blazing and shoot the place up. Alaoui does her best to fight back but Abdul is leading the charge. Through the fighting, Alaoui and Abdul wind up duking it out while Bastien handles Abdul's right-hand man, Driss. Bastien just about comes out on top while Alaoui kills Abdul after stabbing him in the eye and driving this through his skull. With police heading back, the gang breathe a sigh of relief after coming out in one piece. How does K.O. end? Leo is finally free and no longer hunted by the (presumably defunct) Manchour gang, while Emma is reunited with her son. It seems he'll now have a way of handling and channelling his anger, courtesy of Bastien's guidance too. As for Bastien, he intends to head out and carve a new name for himself, deciding that it's time to find something new to fight, looking out at the sunset ready for another day. Read More: K.O. Movie Review
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Post Office compensation chief steps down after Sir Alan Bates raised 'serious concerns' about schemes
A Post Office boss who backed compensation for Horizon IT scandal victims has left his position as Sir Alan Bates raised 'serious concerns' about schemes. Leader of the Post Office's Remediation Unit, Simon Recaldin, is believed to have opted for voluntary redundancy and left his post this week. It comes as the first part of a public inquiry report into the controversy, analysing the compensation process as well as the affect on victims, is anticipated to be released in the coming weeks. More than 900 sub-postmasters were prosecuted between 1999 and 2015 after faulty accounting software made it look as though money was missing from their accounts. Hundreds are still waiting for payouts despite the previous government announcing that those who have had convictions quashed are eligible for £600,000. A Post Office spokesperson said yesterday Mr Recaldin's departure was a part of an 'organisational design exercise' across the firm. Now Joanne Hanley, who was previously a managing director and global head of client servicing, data and operations for Lloyds', is understood to have taken up a large portion of the former Post Office chief, according to The Telegraph. It comes as Post Office hero Sir Alan Bates accused the government of running a 'quasi kangaroo court' payout system for the scandal's victims last month. More recently, Sir Alan said he would prefer to see the compensation schemes thrown out rather the people working on them. 'We have got serious concerns about the transparency and the parity across the schemes,' he told The Telegraph. Last November, Mr Recaldin giving evidence to the inquiry, apologised after it was unearthed staff who were managing compensation claims had also been embroiled in prosecutions relating to the scandal. When queried about ex Post Office investigators he said: 'So my regret – and it is a genuine regret – is that when I came in, in January 2022, that I didn't do that conflicts check, check back on my inherited team, and challenge that.' It comes as the Sir Alan, who famously won his High Court battle with the Post Office in 2019 revealed that he had been handed a 'take it or leave it' compensation offer of less than half his original claim. Mr Bates, 70, said the first offer, made in January last year, was just one sixth of what he was asking for, adding that it rose to a third in the second offer. He has now been given a 'final take it or leave it offer' - which he said amounts to 49.2 per cent of his original claim. He, alongside 500 other sub-postmasters, will now have to lodge their bid for compensation via the Group Litigation order, managed by the Government. Bates, who led the sub-postmasters' campaign for justice, attacked the government for reneging on assurances given when the compensation schemes were set up The Post Office currently manages the Horizon Shortfall Scheme, which is seperate to the aforementioned. This scheme was organised for victims who have not been compensated but believe they experienced financial loses due to the IT scandal. A Post Office spokesman said: 'As part of the Post Office's commitment to deliver a 'new deal for postmasters', we have undertaken a review of our operating model to ensure we have the right structure in place. 'We have been in consultation with a number of colleagues from across the business, including the Remediation Unit. As a result of this Post Office-wide organisational design exercise, Simon Recaldin has left the business.'
