Aramburu murder: three defendants, three distinct defence strategies at trial
Loïk Le Priol, Romain Bouvier and Lyson R. are facing trial with radically different charges and defence strategies. Rugbyrama.fr details the stakes.
Aramburu trial: defendants with clearly separated defence strategies
According to rugbyrama.fr, Loïk Le Priol, Romain Bouvier and Lyson R. will present themselves before the jury with judicial situations and defence strategies that are radically distinct in the case of Federico Martin Aramburu's murder.
Le Priol pleads self-defence and contests premeditation
Loïk Le Priol is facing the most serious charge: murder. Arrested in Hungary four days after the events while heading towards Ukraine, he remains incarcerated. He does not deny having fired — six shots — but his defence, assured in particular by Me Xavier Nogueras and Pierre-Henri Baert, is structured around two axes.
The first consists of contesting premeditation, an element essential to characterise murder. The second is based on self-defence: Le Priol claims to have felt threatened during the final confrontation with Aramburu and Hegarty and to have fired to protect himself.
The prosecution and the civil parties will oppose this version with the sequence of the preceding minutes: after an initial fight ended by the intervention of bar staff at Mabillon, Le Priol had actively gone searching for the two former rugby players, carrying a weapon. Aramburu and Hegarty had left the premises on foot. Forty-one seconds after an initial series of four shots fired by Romain Bouvier, Le Priol had found them and had fired six times.
Bouvier: attempted murder, but no death attributable to him
Romain Bouvier, still incarcerated at La Santé prison, is facing trial for attempted murder — and not for murder, as was initially the case. This distinction constitutes a first legal victory for his lawyers: the courts have indeed separated his responsibility from that of Le Priol and did not establish that he was responsible for Aramburu's death.
Bouvier admits to having fired four times when he located Aramburu and Hegarty aboard the Jeep driven by Lyson R. However, he contests any homicidal intention, referring to warning shots directed at the ground.
His strategy should consist of maintaining a clear separation between the two shooting incidents: first his four shots, then, forty-one seconds later, the six new shots from Le Priol. For Bouvier, the challenge will be to convince the jury of the absence of murderous intent. The prosecution will, however, put to him a central question: why had he gone, armed and aboard a vehicle, searching for the two rugby players after the end of the first altercation?
Lyson R.: the question of intention at the heart of everything
The situation of Lyson R., Le Priol's partner at the time of the events, differs considerably. Incarcerated for nine months, she had been released under judicial supervision in December 2022. She is nonetheless facing trial for attempted murder.
Her material role is established: she was the one driving the Jeep aboard which Bouvier had taken a place, enabling the location of Aramburu and Hegarty. Her defence, however, contests that she knowingly participated in a criminal project. During the investigation, she had stated that the two men wished to take revenge after the fight and that she had attempted to dissuade them.
The entirety of her case should therefore be played out around the notion of intention: did she know that Bouvier was armed? Was she aware of his intentions when she took the wheel? Was she conscious of participating in an attempted murder, or did she find herself drawn into a situation beyond her control? These questions will be submitted to the jury in the coming weeks.
Source: Google News FR — Crime (fr)