Counsellor dismissed from Princess Charlene Children’s Home after slanderous accusation
The allegations cost the counsellor his job - (c) Communication Department
The son in his thirties and his retired mother were convicted by the Monaco Criminal Court.
On 2 March 2017, the Police Department received a complaint from a man who had come to report a counsellor at the Monegasque children’s home where his son and daughter, along with his ex-wife, were staying at the time. The 4-year-old girl allegedly described being sexually abused the previous day. “Adrien* put his hand in my knickers and jiggled,” she is quoted as saying. The little girl repeated this to the police, but later told her mother that her father and grandmother had told her to say that. When she appeared before the examining magistrate, she changed her story slightly.
Advertising
“The situation with your ex-wife is very tense, as is the relationship between you and the staff at the home. You and your mother are a tight unit, showing a united front and you contest absolutely everything,” the President summarised, addressing the 37-year-old man who had already been convicted of violence towards his partner. “You accused your ex-wife of beating the children, of having sex with other men in front of them… The counsellors all state that you are uncooperative and that you make disparaging remarks about the mother who, on the other hand, is making an effort.”
A letter sent to the Palace
The father decided to send a letter to the Prince’s Palace, alleging abuse at the home. The matter was taken no further until the complaint was submitted, at which point the counsellor was taken into custody and the child was examined by experts. Their assessment was guarded: the little girl’s statement appeared to be somewhat fabricated, typical for a child of her age, and a physical gesture could have been misinterpreted, rather than necessarily an assault.
The court president explained during the hearing on Tuesday, January 23, that the defendant’s ex-wife had remarried, and was planning to move to Haute-Savoie with the children. “According to staff at the home,” Florestan Bellizona continued, “everything you said is a lie, and your goal was to stop the move. It certainly put it off, but it did not prevent it.”
Emotional and financial distress
The defendant maintained everything was true: “that day, I was beside myself. I reacted like any father would. And I will always believe my daughter. She may have misinterpreted things, but in any case, there shouldn’t have been any contact with her private parts.” The victim was not present, but was represented by his lawyer Christophe Ballerio. “I have the unpleasant feeling that the word of a four-year-old child has been instrumentalised to further the interests of her father and grandmother. The impact on my client’s health and financial situation were dire. May I remind you that he lost his job, with a wife and two children to support. He suffered such emotional distress that he had to take a host of tranquillisers and antidepressants. He had been working at the home for 15 years.” A little over €100,000 in damages were sought.
The prosecutor asked that both be convicted. “It reminds me of rape cases, where the magistrates’ job is complex, because there were no cameras at the scene. Does this mean we should acquit or dismiss the case? I don’t believe so. The little girl says she was abused, and the father happily takes her back to the home that evening? I find that ludicrous. The child would have been kept at home if they really believed she had been sexually assaulted. I believe he wanted to get the children out of care and back with him. Today the damage has been done, and the harm to the victim and the children can never be repaired.” Julien Pronier asked for a six-month suspended sentence.
Acquittal requested
“Instrumentalising a child? Who could have done such a thing? Only psychopaths could come up with something like that. Which these two are not. I ask for madam to be acquitted and that the sums requested be reduced to a fairer amount,” said the grandmother’s lawyer Clyde Billaud.
Defending the children’s father, Erika Bernardi conceded “my client behaved inappropriately, but that is not sufficient to convict him. A father felt that his children would be taken away from him. His statement hasn’t changed over the course of the three-year investigation. I would also like to come back to the term “jiggled”. It is not insignificant. Is that the kind of word a grown man would use? I don’t believe so for a moment. Yes, it is an unfortunate situation for the victim, but my client did not act with malice aforethought.” The Monegasque lawyer also asked for an acquittal.
After deliberation, the court gave its decision on Tuesday, February 13, finding the two defendants guilty and handing down suspended 10-month prison sentences. They must also pay the sum of €62,000 to the civil party, in compensation for material and non-material damages.
* The name has been changed