An SBM chef has been given a reduced sentence after physically assaulting his Ukrainian partner in the presence of her children…

The incident, which took place on 23 January in a building on the Boulevard de Belgique, highlighted the seriousness of domestic violence and the difficulty of punishing such crimes.

At the immediate appearance hearing court, the presiding judge, Florestan Bellinzona, reported on the outrageous remarks made by the defendant, including:

“You belong to me. I can do what I like with you. I can even take your life!”

These words, marked by a desire to dominate, were perceived as an explicit demonstration of power.

An ‘ordinary’ couple’s argument fuelled by alcohol degenerated into a brutal assault : blows to the face, strangulation, tackling to the ground and terrifying screams marked the scene, prompting the rapid intervention of neighbours who alerted the Sûreté publique.

A toxic relationship

The chef tried to justify his actions by referring to a ‘toxic’ relationship that had been deteriorating for several months. According to his statements, the difficulty of ‘proving his love’ on a daily basis had created unbearable tension, prompting him to act violently to put an end to the incessant arguments.

He minimised his actions by describing them as a ‘loss of temper’, and said that, despite the seriousness of the events, he had not strangled his partner in order to avoid irreversible damage.

The reaction of the judiciary and the victims

The violence used, which was all the more revolting in the presence of children, outraged the court. Valérie Campora, Director of AVIP (assistance to victims of criminal offences), who appeared alongside the victim, expressed the hope that the defendant would be given a real wake-up call to change his ways once and for all.

For her part, Emmanuelle Carniello, representing the Public Prosecutor’s Office, condemned the offence, insisting that no one should have the right to treat another person as a possession.

While the prosecution recommended a sentence of twelve months, with probation and an obligation to receive treatment for three years, the defence emphasised the defendant’s sincerity and remorse, as well as the difficult context of the relationship.

The verdict

At the end of the deliberations, the court decided to sentence the chef to nine months’ probation, considering that the risk of re-offending was low.

This decision, although criticised by some for its leniency, reflects the complexity of domestic violence cases, where criminal sanctions are mixed with consideration of mitigating personal circumstances.

This verdict has reopened the debate on the effectiveness of legal measures in dealing with domestic violence and the need for appropriate therapeutic follow-up to prevent future offences. The debate remains open as to the fair punishment for violent acts, especially when they occur in the presence of children, thus aggravating the seriousness of the acts in the eyes of society.

Illustration photo: @pexels