Guest of BFMTV, Maître Stéphane Maugendre, former lawyer for Margaux Pinot, explained the reasons for the change of advice and indicated that he had asked the public prosecutor to appeal after the release of Alain Schmitt, accused of violence against the judoka.
He assisted Margaux Pinot in the early hours of the case. Since then, Stéphane Maugendre is no longer the lawyer for the judoka, who accuses his trainer and companion, Alain Schmitt, of violence. Invited on BFMTV this Thursday, the former counsel of the Olympic team champion, confirmed.
“She decided to change lawyers, he confirmed. It is understandable, she was disappointed not with the work I did for her, nor with my pleading, but with the decision rendered on Tuesday evening at 12:30 a.m. I understands Margaux, she is disappointed and believes that changing lawyers may allow her to be heard by the Paris Court of Appeal.”
“I asked the prosecutor to appeal”
The lawyer explained the first elements of the investigation and the acquittal pronounced by the criminal court of Bobigny against Mr. Schmitt. Since then, the prosecution has appealed the decision, at the request of Mr. Maugendre.
“The court decided to release him by dismissing objective elements from the file, he continues. We know that in this kind of case of intra-family violence, it is the word of one against that of the other and it is up to the court to look for elements since the statements are subjective elements. I believe that these objective elements made it possible to confirm Margaux’s version. The court decided otherwise. Justice is like that and there is the possibility of appealing. I asked the public prosecutor of Bobigny to appeal, which they decided to do extremely quickly, at noon the day after the decision.
Margaux Pinot is now represented by Me. Rachid Madid. A choice understood by his former lawyer who does not see a change in strategy or version. “Not at all, he declared. There is disappointment with the decision. It is not at all a question of changing since it was drawn up by mutual agreement with Margaux and I think that it won’t change it. She says exactly what it is. She feels that the decision that has been made is not right for her. She may need to have her interests defended by another counsel. That’s the normal game, there is no difficulty. She is disappointed.”
He finally turned on the physical sequelae presented by the two people of the couple during the immediate comparison hearing. “Mr. Schmitt actually had a black eye at the hearing when he compared, he said. Concerning Margaux, after the medical certificate from the forensic units, she had an MRI and it was found that the “proper nasal bones were fractured without displacement. It is a document that I filed in court and which was debated contradictorily.