Still Missing France - Narumi Kurosaki, 21, Besancon, 4 Dec 2016 *arrest in 2020* *Guilty, Appeal 2023*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Affaire Narumi. Le procès Zepeda reporté, décryptage d’un fiasco judiciaire

"What guarantee is there that, in a few weeks, a few months, Mr. Nicolas Zepeda will not repeat this stunt, this way of proceeding which is absolutely untenable in the eyes of the family?", the lawyer for the mother and sisters of Narumi Kurosaki had asked herself just before.

This question was to be answered by her colleague for the prosecution, Mr Schwerdorffer, at the end of the hearing. On leaving the court, the lawyer for Arthur Del Piccolo, the boyfriend from Besançon of the missing woman, explained that if Nicolas Zepeda were to find himself again without a lawyer at the opening of the next trial, "the law is very clear."

"The president of the future court of assizes will automatically appoint a lawyer that the accused cannot refuse. And if the accused does not wish to be supported by this court-appointed lawyer, the latter will simply ensure that the procedure is respected during the trial. And Nicolas Zepeda will represent himself."


BBM
 
New court date for the appeal.

Procès de Nicolas Zepeda pour l'assassinat de Narumi Jurosaki : le Chilien sera jugé en décembre à Vesoul


The Besançon prosecutor's office announced on Monday evening (3 April) the new trial dates for Nicolas Zepeda, charged with the assassination of his ex-girlfriend Narumi Kurosaki in 2016. The trial of the Chilean will take place in December 2023, in Vesoul.

Despite the terrible setback of the first attempt at the appeal of Nicolas Zepeda, prosecuted for the assassination in 2016 of his ex-girlfriend Narumi Kurosaki, it will be in 2023 that the young Chilean will be tried. On Monday 3 April, the Besançon public prosecutor's office announced the new dates of the trial. It will take place before the Assize Court of Vesoul from 4 to 20 December 2023.

Nicolas Zepeda, suspected of having killed his ex-girlfriend Narumi Kurosaki in Besançon in 2016, was sentenced in first instance by the Besançon Assize Court in April 2022 to 28 years of criminal imprisonment. The 32-year-old Chilean never stopped claiming his innocence and immediately appealed. His appeal trial was transferred to the Assize Court of Vesoul, and was scheduled to take place from 21 February to 10 March.

But from the first day of the hearing, nothing went according to plan. Nicolas Zepeda appeared before the court without a lawyer, without it being clear who had dismissed the other, his former lawyer or the Chilean, a few hours before the appeal trial. A court-appointed lawyer had been assigned to him, but in the end it was a criminal lawyer from the Clermont-Ferrand bar who took over his defence, and requested a postponement of the trial to prepare Nicolas Zepeda's defence. A very difficult sequence for the victim's family and friend.

It will therefore be again in Vesoul, and in December, that Nicolas Zepeda will be tried. His new defence could be radically different from that of the first instance. The father of the Chilean, Humberto Zepeda, one of the biggest fortunes in his country, who was silent in the first instance, has already made himself heard in Vesoul.

BBM



Who plans these dates? The night of 4 to 5 december is the anniversary of Narumi's murder!
 
Affaire Narumi. À 12 jours de son procès, Nicolas Zepeda engage l’avocat de Karim Benzema, Me Cormier

With 12 days to go before the start of his trial, Nicolas Zepeda hires Karim Benzema's lawyer, Me Cormier

Nicolas Zepeda, who still denies having murdered Narumi Kurosaki, is changing his defence once again.
According to our information, the Chilean has hired a new lawyer, Sylvain Cormier, ahead of his appeal trial in Vesoul on 4 December. The lawyer from the Lyon bar will be assisting Renaud Portejoie, who will remain on the case.


Nicolas Zepeda has a taste for last-minute changes. A new lawyer will be defending the Chilean in his appeal, which begins on 4 December in Vesoul. The new man is Sylvain Cormier. Contacted by L'Est Républicain, the lawyer himself confirmed the news on 22 November.

A member of the Lyon Bar, this experienced lawyer made a name for himself by defending, among others, the interests of footballer Karim Benzema, notably in the "sextape affair". This case involved blackmail between the former Real Madrid star and his France team-mate Mathieu Valbuena.

Mr Cormier recently pleaded in Franche-Comté in a murder case, that of "l'inconnue du Frasnois". The victim, who could not be identified for a long time, was a Romanian prostitute who was dumped in a foredt in the Jura in December 2016, a few days after Narumi Kurosaki disappeared.

The Lyon criminal lawyer defended the accused, who denied any involvement. Alexandre Verdure was sentenced to 20 years in prison at first instance, then to 30 years on appeal.

Approached by the Zepeda clan a few weeks ago, Sylvain Cormier has stepped in at short notice to replace Julien Dreyfus, who announced on 17 November that he was withdrawing from the case without giving any further explanation. The Chilean's new lawyer will be backing up Renaud Portejoie, who is staying on board.

According to our information, Mr Cormier met Nicolas Zepeda at the beginning of the month in his cell at Orléans prison, to discuss the substance of the case and his defence strategy. On Wednesday, he sent a letter to the Assize Court, confirming his presence at the forthcoming trial.

Narumi's former partner is no stranger to 180-degree turns. At first instance in Besançon, Zepeda was represented by Jacqueline Laffont, a nation wide well-known lawyer whose clients include Nicolas Sarkozy and the current Minister of Justice, Éric Dupont-Moretti.

Sentenced to 28 years' imprisonment, the South American immediately appealed, before finally opting for another prestigious Parisian law firm. That of Mr Vey. In a twist of fate, the new strongman of Zepeda's defence withdrew three days before the appeal trial, that was initially scheduled for February. This new development created legal chaos and, to everyone's surprise, the proceedings had to be postponed until ten months later.

How can such instability be explained? One theory put forward by some observers of the case is that Nicolas Zepeda and his father, Humberto, are very adamant about their strategy. This rigidity could generate tensions with his lawyers when it comes to fine-tuning his line of defence.

So here we are. In twelve days' time, Nicolas Zepeda will once again face an assize court, anxious to defend himself against the murder charges brought against him. Narumi Kurosaki has not been seen since 5 December 2016. The body of the Japanese student has never been found, but many investigative evidences point to a single suspect. Her Chilean ex-boyfriend.

BBM


Who would have thought? part 1, 2, 3, 4 .... a lot can still happen in 12 days too.

At least, this lawyer has experience with clients who deny everything and get a higher penalty on appeal. One wonders if he would not be better placed with the prosecution? Asking for a friend.
 
The trial in appeal is starting tomorrow, December 4th, before the court in Vésoul.

On the side of the prosecution, the same counsels and prosecutor are returning.
For the defense, two new faces will appear: Maître Renaud Portejoie and Maître Sylvain Cormier.
The judge and the jury will be new.

In september, a new psychiatric report was made of Nicolás Zepeda.

Rumour has it that the defense will call for new witnesses, possibly the persons who claimed to have met Narumi after the date that she disappeared from her room and was never heard of again.
It is up to the Court to allow (or not) these witnesses.
Normally, during an appeal, you make do with what was offered in the first instance. Those witnesses were known at the time but did not testify during the first trial because after investigation, their observations led to nothing. If I remember well, one person had seen a different woman, and that woman was located, but she wasn't Narumi.

Papa Zepeda attaches a lot of importance to the existence of these alleged witnesses and it is suggested that he is behind the new strategy of the defense.

I would have loved to read more, but most of the relevant info is subscription-only.
 
l'Est Republicain, Liveblog Day 1

08:40
"Kurosaki family lawyer: "No hope of a confession

A few minutes before the opening of Nicolas Zepeda's appeal trial, Sylvie Galley, the lawyer for Narumi Kurosaki's family, shares her client's feelings: "She is emotionally extremely affected and weakened".

The trial opens 7 years to the day after Narumi's disappearance. "She usually spends this time in contemplation", added Mr Galley. "The family has come here with no hope of either revelations or confessions. Narumi's mother and her two sisters are here for one reason and one reason only: to honour Narumi's memory.

08:45
Narumi's mother and sisters enter the courtroom

Taeko, Honami and Kurumi Kurosaki enter the courtroom at a very slow pace. Narumi's two sisters support their mother by the arm. Taeko is dressed head to toe in black, her face masked by a hood and a medical mask. All three wish to remain silent. They take their seats on the bench, five metres from Nicolas Zepeda's parents. Without even glancing in their direction.

08:50
Nicolas Zepeda arrives at the Vesoul courthouse

Just before 8.45am, Nicolas Zepeda has arrived at the courthouse in Vesoul, Haute-Saône. In a few minutes, his appeal trial is due to begin, lasting two to three weeks.

09:00
Nicolas Zepeda "is ready" according to his lawyer, Renaud Portejoie

Nicolas Zepeda's lawyer, Renaud Portejoie, assures the court in Vesoul that his client "is ready". "We're going to do everything we can to ensure a different trial. We're expecting a change in both form and substance. For example, Nicolas Zepeda is expected to speak French. "We're going to be more fluid and responsive," he continues.

09:15
Nicolas Zepeda appears in the dock, the hearing is opened

Under the watchful eye of three accompanying officers, Nicolas Zepeda appears through a back door in the dock. He glanced at his parents seated a few metres away, then at his two lawyers, giving them a furtive thumbs-up. Dressed in a checked shirt and jeans, the Chilean looks calm, as usual.

Nicolas Zepeda stands up and briefly states who he is and a few things about himself. A major departure from his first trial, the South American spoke correct French, with a slight accent.

The Assize Court will now draw lots to select the jurors, whose task will be to accompany the three professional judges in trying Nicolas Zepeda. Charged with murder, the Chilean faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

10:10
A total of 25 different media accredited

The Besançon Court of Appeal, which is responsible for organising the trial, has issued accreditation to 25 different media, around half of whom are Japanese or Chilean. During the first trial in Besançon, around forty media followed the hearing.

In addition to the main courtroom, two broadcast rooms have been set up in the courtroom so that journalists and the general public can follow the proceedings.

10:25
Jurors and witnesses reviewed

The Assize Court dwells on a tedious but necessary procedural stage: the drawing of lots to select the jurors. Nicolas Zepeda will be judged by five men and four women from the community, in addition to the presiding judge, François Arnaud, and two assistant judges.

The court will also call all the witnesses who will be called to testify either on the stand or by videoconference from abroad.

The hearing is temporarily suspended and will resume at around 11am.


BBM
 
Last edited:
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog Day 1. continued

11:10
The hearing resumes

The presiding judge will now present a summary of the case. Nicolas Zepeda, who aims to speak French during this second trial, has put on his headphones to listen to the translation.

"Miss Narumi Kurosaki, born in Tokyo on 23 July 1995, was due to attend an intensive French language course in Besançon for 4 months..." begins the presiding judge. He went on to talk about her worrying disappearance in December 2016 and the fact that no one had seen her since 4 December, even though disturbing messages had been sent from her e-mail accounts.

The president returned to the lack of disorder and traces of blood in the student's room and the judicial investigation, opened on 16 December, which was to reveal that Narumi Kurosaki had last been seen alive at around 4.30pm as she returned from a dance class on 4 December 2016. Exactly seven years ago...

11:30
The presiding judge details the entire investigation

Draped in his red robe, presiding judge François Arnaud continues his monologue in an otherwise silent courtroom, the only background sound being the voices of the two Spanish and Japanese interpreters charged with transcribing the proceedings live.

Step by step, the magistrate describes the main points of the investigation: the night-time screams in the university residence on the night Narumi disappeared, Nicolas Zepeda's comings and goings around Besançon, his suspicious purchases (5 litre can of flammable products, matches, detergent), the strange messages sent from the student's accounts, the computer clues gathered by the police...

The presiding judge also looks back at the tensions within the couple, culminating in the break-up at the beginning of October 2016, two months before Nicolas Zepeda's surreptitious visit to Besançon. Over the next three weeks, the Assize Court will go through these details one by one.

François Arnaud's meticulous account focuses on the versions put forward by the accused during the investigation. This is an important point. The prosecution readily points out the apparent inconsistencies in Nicolas Zepeda's statements, when compared with certain elements of the investigation.

Silently seated in his box, hands folded in his lap, Nicolas Zepeda has taken off his translation headphones. He listens, motionless and concentrated, to the words of the presiding judge.

11:45
Nicolas Zepeda's first words soon

The presiding judge has just recalled that in the first instance, the Besançon Assize Court found Nicolas Zepeda guilty of killing Narumi and sentenced him in April 2022 to 28 years' imprisonment.

He is now detailing the reasons for this judgement. The fact remains, however, that an appeal sets all scores back to zero. The new proceedings will now begin in earnest, with the defendant's first words.

12:04
"I didn't kill Narumi", an emotional Nicolas Zepeda insists

At the presiding judge's invitation, Nicolas stands up. The whole room is hanging on his every word. "What is your position on these accusations?" the judge asks him.

"Mr. Presiding Judge, I contest the charges against me with all my might," the accused replies in French, "these are horrible charges brought against me, in addition to Narumi's disappearance. It's been a real nightmare, I carry Narumi in my thoughts. I think of the enormous grief her family is going through."

Emotion seems to be gripping Nicolas Zepeda. Tremors appear in his voice. "I didn't kill Narumi," the Chilean says, "I hope that this trial will bring us as close as possible to what really happened. To the truth. The truth that we need, perhaps, in order to find her."

12:10
The trial resumes at 2pm

The hearing is suspended. The proceedings will resume at 2pm. The afternoon will be devoted to the personality of the accused. Relatives and close friends will be heard, before the accused is questioned on his personality.


BBM
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog Day 1. continued


13:58
Defence lawyer Sylvain Cormier says he is ready to "rise to the challenge".

Defence lawyer Sylvain Cormier is ready to rise to the challenge of this appeal trial. "Experience often shows that an appeal trial does not run at all like the trial that preceded it," he explaines before the re-opening of proceedings.

14:10
Three witnesses "pulled out of the hat" by the defence

The hearing resumes with a surprise. The first of many? As reported by L'Est Républicain, the defence recently sent a letter requesting that three last-minute witnesses be heard.

"I'm surprised by this request, which comes three days before the opening of this session," Me Galley comments soberly on behalf of the Kurosaki family.

Etienne Manteaux, the public prosecutor and voice of the prosecution, is more outspoken. "The defence has the right to make such requests. We received witness subpoenas in advance, and then these three new names come out of the hat, including one person who has gone viral in the Chilean media to say that this investigation was carried out by the prosecution," the prosecutor observes.

This man, Saïd Nemeri, had already given several interviews a few months ago, explaining that he had seen Narumi on 11 December 2016, six days after she allegedly disappeared. He also spoke of police manipulation to rig the investigation. Present in Vesoul on Monday, and determined to speak out, Saïd Nemeri again spoke to the media outside the courthouse.
image-1701697203.jpg


Etienne Manteaux doesn't want to avoid a confrontation: "I can't be satisfied that the right to be heard is a one-way street, but I only want one thing to come out of this trial: the truth. Let him be heard, I'm not afraid of anything. I want everything to be said. A retort from the defence. Feigning astonishment, Me Cormier recalled that at the first trial, new CCTV images had been introduced into the proceedings by the prosecution.
Presiding judge François Arnaud accepted the defence's request. These witnesses will be heard on Wednesday and Thursday.

14:45
The hearing of Nicolas Zepeda's parents begins

The parents of the defendant will now testify before the jury. Starting with the father, Humberto, who takes the stand, very solemn, placing before him a folder containing photos and videos on which he intends to base his presentation "of who Nicolas is". As well as notes "to better present our vision of this case".

The presiding judge points out, however, that the adversarial nature of the proceedings means that all the parties must be informed beforehand, and invites Humberto Zepeda to hand over the documents so that he can give his opinion.
Assisted by an interpreter, the sixty-year-old Chilean engineer continued by asking whether he and his wife would be able to see their son during the breaks. "We've travelled 14,000 km and it's been 8 months, since the last hearing, since we've seen him".

The presiding judge is not opposed in principle, but "it remains to be seen what the security arrangements will be."

15:00
Humberto Zepeda: "For 7 years, the whole family has been living with the misery of these deplorable events".

After a lengthy preamble recounting his personal and professional history, Humberto Zepeda, 60, who describes himself as "unemployed and without income for the last three years", goes on to explain that "for seven years, the whole family has been living through these lamentable events in suffering. I apologise if I get emotional, but when I talk about my children I lose my voice. It's not part of my personality to speak loudly. I learnt something from Desmond Tutu, winner of the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize: "It's not a question of raising your voice, but of giving more arguments".

The father of the defendant goes on to talk about the various searches he has carried out, particularly on the internet, "to find out more about this case". He goes on at length about his son's extradition three years ago. He describes it as "a unique case in Chile, especially as it sets a precedent for anyone to be extradited without sufficient evidence. It's the first time in Chilean history that this has happened, and since then the population has grown suspicious of their country's justice system".

Humberto Zepeda has been speaking for around twenty minutes and has still not addressed his son's personality.

15:30
The father of the accused explains that he conducted his own counter-investigation

Humberto Zepeda is his son's first lawyer. "I've been investigating for three years", the father admits, "and I think there are some important points missing. I'm convinced that the police investigation was carried out to convict my son, and not to find Narumi. They didn't make every effort to do that. Nicolas was there, and they had to accuse him...".

Humberto Zepeda pauses, hesitating: "There's a lot to say, I don't know if there's a time limit? The presiding judge reassures him on this point, but takes the opportunity to refocus him, inviting him to talk about his son's personality instead.

"As a father, this trial is the only opportunity I have to talk about the investigation, which has focused on secondary details. There are several issues that have not been explored in depth. The first is: what happened in the bedroom? There is no scientific evidence to show that there was any violence leading to death. None, none, none", the 60-year-old insists, his back straight and his voice strong and clear. "There's no forensic evidence either, in Nicolas's car, no DNA, no hair, no fingerprints, nothing on the suitcase, the police found no trace. None whatsoever."

Humberto Zepeda goes on, this time about the police searches south of Dole: "100 people searched for the body for 14 days, using the best specialised dogs in the country, helicopters, drones, sonar... They found absolutely nothing. The only option left was the river. There are barriers: a body, a suitcase, any animal would have been held back. But they didn't find anything.

As the father rattles off specific details of the investigation, presiding judge François Arnaud interrupts him a second time, inviting him to "refocus" his testimony. In passing, the judge expresses surprise at the father's possible access to the investigation file, which was sealed under the seal of judicial confidentiality. There was some commotion in the room. "The family received the procedure as part of the extradition," Mr Cormier notes for the defence. "And everything was said at first instance", according to Mr Portejoie.

15:50
Determined and inflexible, Humberto Zepeda continues to evoke the grey areas of the case

Invited by the presiding judge to speak about his son's personality, Humberto Zepeda refers to the images he brought with him and regrets that he was not allowed to reveal them to the jury (as he had not complied with the procedure requiring the exhibits to be presented to the various parties beforehand). He then veers off again to return to his obsession: meticulously evoking the grey areas of the investigation and the questions left unanswered because of the lack of human remains and confessions.

"Can Mr Zepeda take into account what I said to him earlier", the presiding judge asks again. "Thank you, Mr Presiding Judge", the sixt-year old replies. And he goes on to resume, without taking the magistrate's remark into account, his enumeration of the uncertainties that, in his opinion, remain in this case. Determined and inflexible. In a word, stubborn.

16:30
"You're ignoring what I'm asking you," the presiding judge is annoyed".

With his hands on his desk, Humberto Zepeda does not deviate from his goal: to track down the supposed inconsistencies in the investigation. He is astonished when "the police say they have done everything to remove all suspicion from Arthur Del Piccolo", Narumi's French boyfriend at the time of her disappearance. Who is also surprised that video surveillance has not been used to track this Del Piccolo. "There are lines of enquiry that the police have not followed", he insists, over and over again.

Humberto Zepeda is now referring to intimate details given at the hearing by Arthur Del Piccolo, who was asked by the police to give a physical description of Narumi. The absence of pubic hair, her large bust... This was too much for the presiding judge, who cut him off.

"Nearly 40 minutes ago, I gave you a second reminder. I can see that you're not paying any attention to what I'm asking you. Your son already has two excellent lawyers. I'm asking you for the last time to be coherent. Is that clear, Mr Zepeda," François Arnaud snaps.

Humberto nods. And then he moves on more cautiously, in hushed tones: "I think I've already said a lot about Nicolas' personality. There's concrete proof, for example, that Nicolas has never been unfaithful. He's not a jealous man, nor is he a liar. Nicolas Zepeda has two very good lawyers, yes, but I want to talk about what's in my soul. There's no way Nicolas could have done what he's accused of.

17:00
End of the lengthy statement by Zepeda's father

"I think that Nicolas is incapable of doing what he is accused of. Nicolas is a happy person, and happy people do no harm. He loved Narumi very much. And you don't hurt people you love. He had nothing to do with Narumi's disappearance or death."

Humberto Zepeda has just finished giving his spontaneous statement. He spent almost 2 hours castigating the investigation. Before hammering home: "It's impossible that Nicolas did this. I'm not saying this because I'm his father, but with the support of experts and specialists."

"Narumi's family and my family don't deserve this and we're looking for the truth. We need answers that are solid, scientific and unquestionable. How can an investigation be satisfactory if, 7 years later, we still don't know when, how and where Narumi disappeared?"

The presiding judge and the various parties will now question him...



BBM

Oh dear. Did not see this coming. Tend to agree with a remark that I read on Twitter in th tl of reporter Roberto Cox:
that man is just as delusional and control freaky as his son.
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog Day 1. continued


17:15
Father admits to being less sympathetic towards Narumi's family

Humberto Zepeda must now face the criminal lawyers of the civil parties. In her soft but chiselled voice, the lawyer for Narumi's relatives, Me Galley, was surprised to "hear him talk about his family's suffering" without necessarily being "empathetic" towards Narumi's relatives, sitting three metres behind him.

Stung, Humberto Zepeda recalls that he had been sympathetic at the first trial. "And then, three days after talking about this pain, we heard Narumi's family talking about my son being a monster. These are things we don't do", he regrets. As far as his father is concerned, Nicolas Zepeda is not jealous. Another surprise for Me Galley, who quotes an old message sent by the accused to Narumi - "I feel jealous" - suggesting the opposite. "None of his previous relationships mentioned Nicolas as jealous, and if they had, I would have known about it". The lawyer is doubtful.

Me Galley returned to Nicolas Zepeda's "ability to lie" to his own father, citing the episode of his return from France at the end of 2016. Asked by Humberto Zepeda about Narumi's disappearance, the accused had not revealed to him at the time that he had seen the student again. His response was scathing: "Nicolas is not a liar. I made these statements in writing, but now I remember that he showed us photos of him and Narumi in France. Not at the time, but afterwards."

The hearing is suspended until everyone has had a chance to recover.

17:50
The lawyers for the civil parties continue to question Humberto Zepeda

The session resumes.

When asked by Me Galley, Humberto Zepeda states that “Nicolas never had a problem with the police or the justice system and in his childhood, he was never confrontational." "But what is he like when he is angry, “furious”, as he wrote to Narumi?" Me Galley continues. Answer: “When there is conflict, he leaves the scene and does not seek a fight." As for the fact that he needed to join a behavior clinic when he returned to Chile from Japan? “He had done a lot of other things before…” eludes the father.

“Could a breakup between your son and Narumi pose a difficulty for you or your wife? ", Me Pichoff asks now He is the lawyer for Narumi's boyfriend at the time of her disappearance (Me Pichoff replaces Me Schwerdorffer during the first two days of the trial).
Humberto Zepeda responds: “Nicolas was 25 years old, he made his own decisions…” However, notes the civil party's counsel, "in your son's Facebook account, he tells Narumi that he does not see how he is going to explain their breakup to his parents." A writing that Zepeda senior attributes to “distant relationships with [his] son, due to the distance. But I have no comment on the subject, you have to ask Nicolas a question…”
The fact that he allegedly told his cousin in Spain not to talk about his coming to Europe, explaining: “I have problems with my father”? “I never had any problems with Nicolas. If I had problems, I wouldn't be here to defend him. It’s his cousin…”
“And why do you think he does not wish to testify today before the Assize Court, refusing to give his contact details?" the civil party continues to question. “Contact him so he can explain!", Humberto Zepeda replies.
Comment from the civil party's lawyer: “I see that you are much more talkative about the procedure than about your family." He returns to the issue: “And when he says he was contacted by your son to say as little as possible about his visit to his home in Spain following his visit to France? » “Ask him…” replies the father of the accused.

18:20
“Do you know your son?”

Holder of the accusation, Etienne Manteaux launches into the arena without an observation round. “You spoke to us for two hours, but you spoke about your son for less than two minutes... Do you know your son?."the prosecutor launches. Humberto Zepeda, on the defensive, hides behind the court's refusal to examine the photos and videos of his son, which he had brought.
“I had the impression of hearing not Nicolas’ father, but the Zepeda family lawyer. Do you feel like a lawyer today?" Etienne Manteaux continues. “I am an engineer, and I respond according to a survey that I did over three years.” The attorney general tries to find out more about the activities of Nicolas Zepeda upon his return from France, after Narumi's disappearance. “He studied to improve in marketing, he created a company with five employees in his charge.”

Fatigue, challenges, incomprehension? Without warning, the tone rises suddenly in the courtroom... “What is Mr. Zepeda doing with his cell phone? the presiding judge cuts into the questionning , while the father of the accused manipulates his smartphone. From his cubicle, Nicolas instantly rushes to his aid: “He’s looking for my diploma.” Humberto Zepeda gets annoyed, thinking that his son's studies are being questioned. The prosecutor is stunned. “That wasn’t my question!” », he thunders. On the defense side, Me Cormier tries to tackle Etienne Manteaux. The president whistles the end of the game.

18:50
Verbal stand-off between Humberto Zepeda and the prosecutor

Etienne Manteaux is surprised by Father Zepeda's statements, who repeats that proving Narumi's death is "impossible" in the absence of "scientific proof". The exchange turns into a verbal standoff. “Is it that as soon as a murderer makes his victim’s body disappear, the trial is impossible?" Cautious response from Humberto Zepeda: “It’s not impossible, but given the development of current technology, that says it all."
The prosecutor cites case law from the Supreme Court of Chile that confirms his (prosecutor's) point.
“I don’t believe in the perfect crime. In Chile, there are only two people who were convicted without bodies, because there were witnesses,” Humberto Zepeda reacts.

Etienne Manteaux is surprised at the few witnesses cited by the defense to speak about the personality of the accused. “No one likes him, Nicolas Zepeda?" In front of him, at the bar, his father takes the blow. “We are 14,000 kilometers away, all these people are busy or studying.”
Prosecutor's pout. “Video conferencing would allow it."

Etienne Manteaux does not take his eyes off his interlocutor. “We are almost to the hour, seven years after Narumi's last moment of life. Do you still think she's alive?" he tempts. “In my heart, I would be delighted to learn it.”
The attorney general doesn't believe it. “Do you think she would want to torture her family by continuing to live in hiding?"
Humberto Zepeda steps back: “I don’t know.”



BBM
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog Day 1. continued

19:05
Zepeda father quavers, Zepeda son sobs

It is now the turn of the two defense lawyers to ask questions to the father of the accused. His son’s “first lawyer”, Humberto Zepeda, has now been at the bar for more than three hours. “Mr Zepeda”, asks Mr Sylvain Cormier begins, “in one word, how do you deal with this accusation towards your son Nicolas? »
“Unfair!" replies the father of the accused.

“Am I wrong in saying that this has become your obsession?“ Mr. Cormier continues. His voice trembling, Humberto Zepeda: “I am the father and above all I want us to arrive at the truth. Neither Narumi's family nor mine deserve this situation. I am sure that when the truth comes out, Nicolas will be free."

“What makes you cry out his innocence?" the defense lawyer questions next.
“Nicolas is honest,” begins Humberto Zepeda. Asked to clarify his thoughts, his voice breaks. He quavers, on the verge of tears. And explains, while his son, in the dock, sobs and wipes his eyes: “Chile is a country of suffering, where we have experienced numerous earthquakes, with many victims. Chile suffers from fires, thousands of hectares disappear each year.Chile has the highest rate of homeless people. And Nicolas spent weeks rebuilding roofs for these people, he built projects to help people, he was committed to society... And the day he comes out, I am convinced that he will do the same good. He was accused for nothing. Be sure that the day Nicolas is free, he will do good because in his head, there is no room for evil."

19:15
Me Portejoie shakes Humberto Zepeda, his own client

Me Renaud Portejoie takes over from his colleague. His intervention takes a completely unexpected turn.“Mr. Zepeda, Mr. Zepeda, Mr. Zepeda…” he sighs. “I somewhat agree with the public prosecutor when he calls you a lawyer. You've done a bit of our work. The jurors didn't understand anything, because you mentioned technical points which have not even been addressed by the court yet. You are here to explain to us who he is. Do you understand that?” The tone is disconcerting. Humberto Zepeda almost gets scolded by his own lawyer. Me Portejoie tries everything to break his client's armor, in order to exhume in the eyes of the jurors his love, his sensitivity as a father.

“How is your son,” Me Portejoie, insists, raising his voice. “Nicolas always told me that he had absolute confidence in French justice. He never tells me, Dad, I'm feeling bad. How do you expect him to be doing well, having just spent three years in prison? When I talk to him, he asks me how I am,” Humberto Zepeda sobs.

19:20
Shock in the courtroom: “What if Nicolas was guilty?" the defense lawyer imagines.

The walls of the courtroom retract. Me Portejoie faces his client's father, eye to eye: “Did you ask him the question, the one we are all asking ourselves today? Did you ask him what happened on the night of December 5, 2016?"

Humberto Zepeda flees with his hands outstretched. His lawyer raises his voice. “That you are a father convinced of the innocence of your son is so legitimate, but you have the right, for just one moment, to ask yourself the question…”
The father dodges again: “I know all the details of There is no need for me to ask my son about this file,” the interpreter translates.

“Answer my question, Mr. Zepeda…” Renaud Portejoie takes on the false air of a prosecutor. All logic is reversed. “Nicolas was convicted at first instance... During these years, there was not a single second when the absolute conviction of the father was evaporated for a few moments? What if he was guilty? Have you asked yourself this question?"

Around the two men, the silence is deafening.

“Several times... And each time, the facts, the arguments, the file, proved to me his innocence.”
Does the defense lawyer want to break the glass prison, in which the whole family is possibly locked up? That of a denial. “You have your conviction, you said it out loud, but perhaps it does not correspond to reality. There is only one who knows.” Nicolas. Always and again Nicolas. Me Portejoie goes even further, always further. “Let’s pretend he’s guilty.”
His words resonate in the saturated air of the room. “What do you want to say to this kid who has been trapped in a lie for seven years?" The defense lawyer dares everything. “You want to tell him I love you despite everything, we will always be there... Do you want to say well done?"
Humberto Zepeda is knocked out standing. “I would tell him I love you, I trust you. And that I would no longer believe it if the facts proved me otherwise, but today, that is not the case,” Nicolas’ father articulates with difficulty.

Their mano a mano is of maximum intensity. “Why am I asking you these questions? Because some imagine that Nicolas would be guilty, but unable to say it because he wants to preserve the image of the son, the honor of the family, even if it means committing legal suicide. Is it the honor of the family that prevails, or the future of Nicolas Zepeda?"
What is happening: Does Me Portejoie want to break the father, to free the son?
“It’s not about preserving anything. The children go away, go about their lives. It’s not to preserve my image or that of the family,” Humberto Zepeda insists. “It’s not because there is no proof that Nicolas is innocent. You said one day that the truth is what justice will decide… The judicial truth will be that delivered by these judges,” Mr. Portejoie theatrically proclaims, pointing to the jury. Before taking a break. Then in a low voice… “What if they condemn him?”

In the courtroom, no one is breathing. “If they condemn him, everyone will know that there will be an injustice,” Nicolas Zepeda’s father concludes. Me Renaud Portejoie lets go. "Thank you sir."


BBM
 
L'Est Republicain Liveblog, Day 2

08:07 Focus on Japan

Narumi Kurosaki's mother and sisters were the first to enter the courtroom on Tuesday as soon as the doors opened, closely followed by the lawyer from Tsukuba University, who often accompanies them. . In a few minutes, the Court of Assizes will be teleported to Japan, where several witnesses must be heard by videoconference...

On the organizational side, they are crossing our fingers that logistics will all be working. After a dive into the intimacy of the Zepeda family yesterday, with a few moments of dizzying emotion, the trial resumes cruising speed: Japanese comrades of Narumi, staff of the Crous where she was housed, professor of the CLA where she was educated , dance class partner: this will involve, in particular, following in the footsteps of the Japanese student in Besançon. Before she disappears body and soul.

08:43
“I hope the truth comes out” explains Narumi’s college friend

At the opening of the hearing, eyes fall on two large screens installed in the courtroom. A young Japanese man in a suit and tie appears, seated quietly 10,000 kilometers from Vesoul. Shintaro Obata was Narumi's college friend, and accompanied her to Besançon at the end of 2016 to learn French. “I very much hope that the truth comes out about my friend Narumi,” Shintaro Obata says, under the watchful eye of Nicolas Zepeda. Black sweater on his back, translation headset on his ears, the Chilean accused is once again found in his box.

At the end of 2016 in Besançon, his room in Crous was next to that of Narumi. “She was very open and could establish a warm friendship with anyone,” he describes, describing his concern raised the day after his friend’s disappearance.

09:02
A witness with a faulty memory

President François Arnaud addressed the scene in front of Narumi's closed door for the first time on December 5, 2016. That evening, Shintaro Obata and a few other students, including Arthur Del Piccolo, the French boyfriend of the Japanese woman, hang around hoping to see Narumi. A key moment. According to the prosecution, Nicolas Zepeda was still hiding in the 9 m² studio, the body of his ex-partner lying next to him.

Shintaro Obata's hearing is laborious. “I don’t remember,” the witness often responds to the president’s questions, visibly let down by his memory. The magistrate mentions the email then received by Arthur Del Piccolo from Narumi, telling him that she was in the company of another man, and that he should not wait for her. A message undoubtedly written by Zepeda, according to the police. Here again, Shintaro Obata has little left to tell the court, seven years to the day after this scene.

As for the following days? “I remember Arthur being worried.” Shintaro also mentions “the anger” of the boyfriend, “explained by the fact that Narumi might be with another man.”

09:07
“A cry late at night,” says a friend and neighbor of Narumi Kurosaki

Shintaro Obata is now being questioned about the screams heard on the night of December 4 to 5, 2016. “I remember a scream late at night,” he says. “It was a female voice. I had the impression that these screams were coming from a distant place and I told myself that there was someone making a racket. » If at the time he spoke of “thuds” which accompanied the screams, seven years later, his memories are vague.
As for the usual noises in this university residence where Narumi also lived, right next to her room? “We could clearly hear the hubbub of conversations in the corridor, but without understanding what was being said."
Where did these famous night cries come from, according to him? “Coming from a fairly distant place, but I can’t say if it’s due to the distance or the soundproofing caused by the partition that separated our two rooms. Especially since in my half-sleep, I was not completely awake..."


09:22
Narumi “was not someone who considered suicide”

President Arnaud, with his slow, meticulous phrasing, continues the questioning. Step by step. Shintaro Obata knew Narumi well. Was she depressed? Was it possible that she would choose to end her life? “During her stay in France, she was a little homesick, but I can confirm that she was not someone who was thinking about suicide. It’s out of the question,” the witness assures. In the days following Narumi's disappearance, Shintaro Obata confided his feeling to the police: "Someone is tampering with her cell phone." Why so ? the president asks him. “I found a discordance in the writing style, it wasn’t Narumi. In one message, she said she was suddenly going somewhere, it wasn't like her." In this case in Lyon, to change her supposedly damaged passport... While in reality she depended on the consul in Strasbourg.

09:35
A “preposterous” disappearance for the former friend and roommate

Now for the questions from the parties. Starting with Me Galley, lawyer for the Kurosaki family, who asks for an illustration of Narumi’s very “Western” character?
“Unlike many Japanese women, she didn't only hang out with Japanese people. She was more independent and met more strangers. She was part of a dance club… She had the ease to mix with non-Japanese people,” Shintaro Obata replies.
The witness continues on the personality of the deceased: “At the same time as she spoke about her family in Japan, about whom she thought very strongly, she formulated many plans for her future. She was a very active and dynamic person. She's not someone who would think about committing suicide. Her disappearance was absurd and incomprehensible."

09:52
Nocturnal screams at the heart of the issues of this hearing

The screams, more screams, more screams. This is the main issue of this hearing.
Although Narumi's roommate, Shintaro Obata had the impression at the time that these cries were "distant". A boon for the defense of Nicolas Zepeda.The public prosecutor takes control of the debates. “Seven years later, I understand that your memories are no longer clear. I will therefore base myself on your statements at the time,” Etienne Manteaux begins..

“I am not sure that these screams come from Narumi’s room,” Shintaro first wrote to the police, before excluding this hypothesis the next day, still in front of the police. How to explain this difference? “Having a heavy sleeper, I did not have the full capacity of perception. This first impression influenced me.”

The public prosecutor, anxious to support the accusation that an altercation broke out between Nicolas and Narumi in room 106, is obviously interested in this idea of a “heavy sleep”…
Shintaro Obata tries to cope as best he can: “I can neither confirm nor deny that these screams came from the next room. In any case, the scream was loud enough to wake me up."

In his box, Nicolas Zepeda is agitated. The Chilean takes a few notes on a piece of paper, which he discreetly transmits to his lawyer Mr. Cormier, who is seated in front of him. No doubt to offer him advice, while the criminal lawyer prepares to speak.

10:28
Defense digs into crucial screaming issue and reopens trail of new boyfriend

The defense enters the scene to question Shintaro Obata. After being confirmed that his room, 107, and that of Narumi, 106, were only separated by a “light partition”, Me Cormier returns to these cries heard around 3 a.m. and their location.“In the first description you said you thought they came from the ground floor,” he recalls. Before repeating his statements in the second hearing: “If it had happened in Narumi’s room, I would have heard it. It was more like at the end of the hallway. »Asked to assess for the umpteenth time the distance to which the screams heard were carried, Narumi's roommate repeats his inability to "say if the screams came from the ground floor or our floor..."

The defense lawyer now aims to direct suspicion on Arthur Del Piccolo, Narumi's new boyfriend at the time (a lead explored and finally abandoned by the investigators).Does he remember Del Piccolo's role in writing the note about the disappearance of the Japanese student in the days that followed? “We wrote this note together, he and I. He was very cooperative and we both found it helpful to retrace the events that had happened before."

And does he remember that Del Piccolo told him that Narumi was planning to go to the Festival of Lights in Lyon with another man? Shintaro Obata confirms.
Regarding the characteristics of the relationship between Arthur Del Picolo and Narumi, of whom he had told investigators at the time: “Arthur is very much in love with her, she is just in love”? " I do not remember ".
“And when you ask him, ‘Do you know where Narumi is,’ on December 11, what does he say? », continues Me Cormier. “I don’t remember,” replies Shintaro Obata.
The lawyer refreshes his memory: “You’re being brushed off. He says, “Ask her yourself!” And the next few days, he’ll also say, “I don’t really need to know where Narumi is, you know…”

10:33
The defense still tries to point the finger at the new boyfriend

Me Cormier now returns to the writing of the note to report Narumi's disappearance to the Besançon police.The fact that Del Piccolo was initially worried about who Shintaro Obata had shown this note to? That he wanted to rewrite it? “He was in a bad mood about what I had written,” replies the former Japanese next-door neighbour in Besançon. “I especially remember the negative impact that the fact that I had taken such an initiative had on him."

The first witness of the day is done.The president suspends the hearing a few minutes before returning to Japan for new testimony by videoconference


BBM
 
What to remember from the second day of hearing

By videoconference from Japan, four friends of Narumi Kurosaki shared their common vision of the missing woman: an integrated and dynamic young woman, who had confided “being harassed by her former boyfriend”.

While the defense tried to point the finger at Arthur Del Piccolo, Narumi's boyfriend at the time of the events, it was the jealous character of Nicolas Zepeda which was at the heart of the Japanese testimonies.

The hypothesis of "incoherent messages" sent from Narumi's cell phone was raised during the afternoon, by a French teacher, categorical about a spelling error: "She would never have made a mistake of this kind."

Nicolas Zepeda was also supported this Tuesday. “I am proud of Nicolas’s innocence,” said a friend of the accused, to whom he listened with a tender expression and a smile on his lips. She assured that she had seen a stolen video surveillance image in the press, where we see Nicolas Zepeda leaving alone at the back of the Narumi building, without a suitcase, without a body, the day after his disappearance. An image that strangely, no one else saw except those around the accused Chilean.
BBM
According to Narumi's teacher Nicole Poirie:
The teacher validates the hypothesis of Narumi's "ghost messages"

Once again, the subject of Narumi's true-false messages, attributed by the prosecution to Nicolas Zepeda, resurfaces. A phrase – a priori innocuous – caught her attention: “Thank you for caring”. ( Merci de t’en soucier )
For Nicole Poirie, Narumi cannot be the author of these messages. “She would never have used this way of expressing herself. Sorry but it’s my job, I teach French, and this notion of double pronouns is impossible for her. It s too difficult.

Another detail struck her. “She wrote 'je suis venu' (‘I arrived’, female form ) without ‘e’ at the end. I know it's astonishing to be surprised because many French people forget it, but we had worked on it in class and Narumi was very good at it. She would never have made a mistake like that." For the teacher there is only one explanation: “it must be the automatic translators”.
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog, Day 3

09:05
The first witness, a teacher in Japan, opens the proceedings

The bell rings in the assize court: the hearing resumes with the arrival on the stand of Jérémie Bride, an elegantly dressed 37-year-old teacher-researcher.

"I knew Nicolas Zepeda when I was teaching at the University of Tsukuba, and I also knew Narumi before she moved to Besançon. As a Frenchman and - in this case - a Franc-comtois, I was responsible for coordinating exchanges between the two universities.

"In December 2016, I received a call from Shintaro (Narumi's classmate in Besançon, editor's note) telling me that he hadn't heard from Narumi for several days." Spontaneously, Jérémie Bride "thought of Nicolas Zepeda, who might have some information to give us...". At the time, the Chilean seemed "very likeable".

From Japan, Jérémie Bride took matters into his own hands. The teacher and Arthur Del Piccolo, who knew each other from Arthur's previous visits to Tsukuba, got in touch. Together, they try to understand the reasons for Narumi's disappearance.

09:20
Contacted by the witness, Zepeda lies about his recent visit to Besançon

Concerned, Jérémie Bride explains that he phoned Nicolas Zepeda ten days after Narumi disappeared.

"I was trying to find out if he had heard from her," the witness reports. "I also wanted to know where he was and whether he'd had any contact with her. Nicolas told me he was in Chile and sent me a photo with the Chilean flag to prove it. I wondered why he was doing this. I have to admit I had my doubts about whether he was really in Chile.

To be sure, Jérémie Bride called him back the next day, so that Zepeda could prove his bona fides. "He set up his camera and even called out to passers-by in the street "to ask these strangers to confirm it". A surprising reaction.

"Why did you suspect Mr Zepeda almost from the outset?" "Because I was aware of the difficulties in their relationship and nobody in Tsukuba knew what had become of him."

During this discussion, Nicolas Zepeda completely hid his time in Besançon from him.
"He didn't say a word about his recent meeting with Narumi. He told me that he hadn't heard from her for several months... Nor did he tell me about his trip to France. However, he did ask me why I was asking these questions, if I knew anything about something... I told him that her friends in Besançon were worried because they weren't seeing her any more.

Questioned by the presiding judge, the teacher-researcher continued: "Nicolas spoke to me about Narumi's sometimes difficult character, and told me some anecdotes. He told me about his holidays in Japan, by the ocean. He told me that Narumi had disappeared for several hours, explaining that she had a tendency to disappear like that.

Another surprising detail... "Nicolas also told me that Narumi was capable of hitting him when they were together."

09:40
His suspicions about Zepeda: "Apparently I wasn't wrong".

"We thought at the time that Narumi was going to reappear soon. We were trying to gather information to find out where she was. Then it became a police investigation", Jérémie Bride sums up. The witness then withdrew from the investigation, after passing on the data he collected to the police.

The presiding judge tries to look back seven years. To understand how this witness very quickly suspected that Nicolas Zepeda was not being truthful... "We knew that he was an intelligent man, with a certain knowledge of computers", he replies, referring also to the conflict between the couple.

Jérémie Bride is silent: "Apparently, I wasn't mistaken...".

Unlike at previous witness hearings, Nicolas Zepeda never stops taking notes on a notepad as he sits cross-legged in his box. Sometimes he even smiles slightly.

09:45
"I felt Nicolas Zepeda was under stress".

On questioning from the civil party, the teacher-researcher now describes Narumi as "a kind, smiling, intelligent, radiant and sunny person. I knew that her studies in Franche-Comté were going very well."

He then goes on to talk about the "tensions between Narumi and Nicolas Zepeda" of which he was aware. "Tensions that occur between two people, especially when they don't share the same culture."

The Kurosaki family's lawyer, Me Galley, questioned Zepeda's claim that Narumi had hit him. "I found it strange that he should tell me this, especially as we weren't close... After I hung up on him on 14 December, it seemed even stranger. As did his insistence that he was in Chile. That's why I called him back the next day. And that's when I realised he was stressed.

10:10
Me Schwerdorffer points out Nicolas Zepeda's "lies"

A new face has appeared in the courtroom. Randall Schwerdorffer. For the first two days of the trial, he was represented by his partner, Me Pichoff. The lawyer for the civil party gets into the swing of things, going over the famous video call of 15 December 2016 with the witness.

Me Schwerdorffer reads out the detailed interview with Jérémie Bride, who had been questioned by the police seven years earlier. In particular, the passage in which Bride asks Zepeda if he has any news of Narumi? Nicolas tells me "not really, I haven't had any recent news of Narumi, I just heard from someone asking where she was. In any case, I've decided to cut off all contact with Narumi".

The lawyer feigned astonishment. "He saw her on 4 December! How do you interpret this lie? Because we know it's a lie..." Jérémie Bride remains cautious. "Today? Just like everyone else... The question is why Nicolas didn't tell me that he had just seen Narumi."

Me Schwerdorffer answersd for him. "Because he doesn't want anyone to know that he's seen her. Because when Mr Zepeda wants to show you that he's in Chile, he films himself in the street. And he posts images on his Facebook account. But when he doesn't want people to know he's in France, he doesn't put any photos on his Facebook. He filters his information". Jérémie Bride nods in agreement.

The lawyer continues with his reasoning, expressing surprise that Nicolas Zepeda was already vaguely aware, on 15 December 2016, of the possible disappearance of the Japanese student.

"Who would have told him? At the time, there were still no press articles", observes Me Schwerdorffer. There was silence. Then a final dig by way of conclusion: "We'll ask him. He'll think about it and prepare his answer...".

10:30
Nicolas Zepeda wanted to apply for an internship in Besançon, but in vain

Prosecutor Etienne Manteaux reminded Jérémie Bride that he had described Nicolas Zepeda as a "free spirit". Why?
"In the autumn of 2016, we wondered where he was," the teacher says. "We didn't know whether he was still in Japan or elsewhere. In fact, he had gone back to Chile overnight at the beginning of October."

The prosecutor points out that a month earlier, in September 2016, while Narumi was in Besançon and Zepeda was still in Japan, Zepeda had asked a friend to pretend to be him (because he didn't speak French). The Chilean's aim: to apply for a traineeship in Besançon, in order to join Narumi.

As for suspicions about Nicolas Zepeda, Jérémie Bride was soon not the only one to have them. The letter sent by Arthur Del Piccolo, the missing girl's new boyfriend, describes 10 points about Zepeda's involvement in the story. "Yes, but as far as we were concerned, she was only missing at the time," explains Jérémie Bride.

10:40
The defence focuses on Arthur Del Piccolo

Jérémie Bride is an important witness. The price of this status? Being peppered with questions, some of them repetitive. The hitherto conciliatory tone is about to change, as the defence lawyers take the floor.

Me Cormier talks to the teacher about his discussions with Arthur Del Piccolo, when Narumi Kurosaki has been missing for several days. The lawyer insists on reading certain exchanges between the two men, word for word, right up to this incriminating document written against Zepeda.

"Whose idea was it to draw up this list of clues against Nicolas Zepeda," asked Me Cormier. "Maybe me, maybe him, I don't know, but at this stage, everyone wanted to do this kind of thing."

The lawyer points to the title of the list, in English: "Things that make you think that Nicolas Zepeda is behind this". Me Cormier seems to be circling around an idea, which he does not formulate clearly: isn't it Del Piccolo, Narumi's boyfriend, who is actually pulling the strings and directing suspicion towards Nicolas Zepeda?

"From the outset, I thought of Nicolas of my own accord", Jérémie Bride sums up, without taking the bait. "Arthur was particularly active in the search", the witness admits. But "not always, particularly not from 5 to 12 December", Me Cormier corrects.

Jérémie Bride points out the obvious, linked to the false messages sent from Narumi's accounts: "Initially, apparently, any contact Arthur may have had with Narumi was a form of break-up with Narumi. Arthur, offended, didn't take part in the search for information about her, as she was with someone else".

10:50
Tested by the defence, Jérémie Bride wants to "let justice take its course".

After a tug-of-war between Me Cormier, for the defence, and the public prosecutor, then the civil party, Me Renaud Portejoie asks Jérémie Bride if he felt that he had been "abused" by Mr Zepeda? "Of course, he lied to me. He told me that he hadn't heard from Narumi, even though he had seen her in Besançon the previous week", the witness calmly replies.

Is he convinced of his guilt? "No, I'll leave that to the courts.

"You've done the programmes "7 à 8" and "Crimes", are you settling scores?" asks Me Portejoie. "I don't."
"Do you have any anger? "No".


BBM
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog, Day 3, continued

11:10
"Mr Zepeda, please stand up"...

As the hearing draws to a close, Mr Schwerdorffer suggests prolonging the proceedings. Arthur Del Piccolo's lawyer wishes to ask the accused a direct question. The presiding judge agrees.

"Mr Zepeda, stand up...".

The Chilean complied, resting his elbows on the high rail of his box, with his blackened notebook in his hands.

"Why did you lie to Mr Bride?" asks Mr Schwerdorffer. Nicolas Zepeda pretends not to understand the question. Once again, Mr Schwerdorffer calmly details the circumstances of their discussions with the witness.

In fluent French, Nicolas Zepeda launches into a long tirade: "Mr Bride is right to say that we are not close. He wants to know if I'm in Chile. He asks me, "Can you show me? I showed him the street, a little sceptical. He didn't ask me about Narumi. He called me a second time. At that point, my questions were more about my personal life. In the end, he explained that Narumi's Japanese friends were worried. That's information that interests me".
But the question, "Did you see Narumi?" was not asked.

"So he's lying?" Maitre Schwerdorffer smiles. "He didn't ask me that question," Nicolas Zepeda confirms. "I don't see how I could have made that up," Jérémie Bride maintains.

For the defence, Me Cormier steps up to the plate and asks Jérémie Bride if he was sure that Nicolas Zepeda had spoken about Narumi. Answer: "Yes. I told him that Narumi had stopped giving signs of life, he asked me if I'd heard anything about it and then went on at length about their relationship.
"Next, Me Portejoie then puts the teacher-researcher under the microscope: "When you were questioned at the beginning of 2017, did you consider Nicolas Zepeda to be the number 1 suspect?"
"Yes. His name came up all the time."

The session is adjourned.

BBM
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog, Day 3, continued


11:45
Zepeda discovered by surprise in the university residence

The hearing resumes and the presiding judge announces that it is going to be "late".

The new witness, Nadia Ouaked, 31, who arrived in Besançon to study in September 2016, explains that when she returned to her room at the Crous "between 1 and 5 December 2016, at around 4.30-5pm", she was surprised to find the communal kitchen with the door closed and the windows wide open.

When she went to heat up some milk, the student "saw a boy sitting huddled behind the door. He got up and spoke to me in a language I didn't know. We communicated by gestures and in English. He had the puffy eyes of someone who had cried a lot, his hair was dishevelled, he was in a bad state. But he explained to me, using gestures, that he'd just felt faint. He rinsed his face and went out... A few days later, on 16 December, when I got back to the Crous, I spoke to the police who were there. When I went to the police station to make my statement, they showed me a photo board. I recognised Mr Zepeda straight away.

12:00
Witness believes Nicolas Zepeda was hiding from view

Shocked by the situation, the former student took it upon herself to draw the scene in the kitchen. Her sketches were given to the jury. Asked to go into more detail about her encounter with this "stranger", Nadia Ouaked continues: "His way of answering was strange. When I asked him what he was doing here, it was as if he was looking for answers. He was lost."

The court projected onto the screen the photographic plates, presented seven years ago by the police, showing the faces of eight young men with brown hair, all cut short. The portrait of Nicolas Zepeda is number 5. "Did you recognise him straight away? Nadia Ouaked confirms. "Yes, straight away."

The witness repeated that she had the impression that the individual was hiding. "The kitchen is on the 4th floor. It's quieter than the other floors and he was curled up with his head resting on his knees. I felt sorry for him, that's why I wanted to help him."

At the time, realising that she was at the heart of a criminal case, Nadia Ouaked told the police that she was afraid... "Yes, finding myself in a situation like that... It was difficult". She stifles a sob.

12:15
Face to face, the witness and Nicolas Zepeda accuse each other of lying

Nadia Ouaked's description of the incident undermines Nicolas Zepeda's version of events. Until now, Zepeda has always denied that he ever entered Narumi's hall of residence, apart from the evening of 4 December when he was with her.

The question of the timing of the cooking - "early December" according to the witness today - is central. It will be subjected to scrutiny. Is it possible that Nadia Ouaked ran into Nicolas Zepeda on 5 December 2016, just a few hours after the cries of distress heard around Narumi's room?

With the permission of the presiding judge, Me Schwerdorffer puts a direct question to Nicolas Zepeda: "Is this witness lying, deceiving, making things up?" The Chilean defendant stands up: "I was never on the 4th floor, I never saw this person."

Turning to Nicolas Zepeda, three metres away, Nadia Ouaked replies: "I'm certain, sir". Before adding: "I haven't forgotten his face, because it's in my nature: I like to help people in distress. And that day, I was struck by this angelic face, which was in a terrible state. He was crying", the young woman insists.

12:20
First dramatic turn of events: Nicolas Zepeda changes his story

The defence lawyer, Mr Portejoie, jumps into the debate and, while remaining seated, half turns towards his client. He does not go easy on him. "This witness felt sorry for you, she formally recognised you, what have you got to say about that? Because she's obviously not lying, I'll tell you as I think it is!

Standing in the box, Nicolas Zepeda glances at his notebook, then launches into his thoughts: "I entered the building, went to Narumi's room and knocked on her door, on the 1st floor. But I didn't go up to the 4th floor. Why hide? There would have been no reason."

The Chilean puts this incursion at 2 December 2016, "in the afternoon". His lawyer, Mr Portejoie, seems less than satisfied with the Chilean's answers, but he does not give in.

On the stand, Nadia Ouaked is annoyed: "I can't lie about this! I felt sorry for him and if I could have, I would have helped him. I can't make this story up. That kitchen was opposite my bedroom. It's not in my interest to do so, either for the family or for your family", the witness insists, addressing the accused.

12:30
The case is turneing upside down: Nicolas Zepeda changes his story

As a seasoned magistrate, presiding judge François Arnaud senses that everything could change. He takes control of the proceedings with authority and plunges straight into the heart of the matter, with a strategic question: what was the purpose of Nicolas Zepeda's trip to France?

"Essentially, it was to meet Narumi."


This is a first. Until now, the Chilean only said that he had come to France to visit universities. And that his meeting with Narumi, on 4 December 2016, was due to a form of "chance", even though he had slightly nuanced this idea during his first trial.

Why did he want to see Narumi again, and "for what purpose", the presiding judge asks.
Time stands still.
"I wanted things to be on the right track", Nicolas stammers a little, anxious to envisage "a more constructive follow-up to our friendship, I wanted to have answers to the questions" raised by a long-distance break-up.

Was he thinking of rekindling their relationship? "I don't think so, but in any case it was worth staying in touch. We've got to know each other, why lose that?"

The presiding judge wondered gently, as if not to frighten him: "You never initially admitted that the purpose of your trip was to see Narumi Kurosaki again..." Nicolas Zepeda calmly admits. "That's right."

BBM
 
L'Est Republicain, Liveblog, Day 3, final remarks

What to remember

Nicolas Zepeda admitted to having “lied” in the past, and promises new changes: even if he still denies having killed Narumi, this Wednesday will remain a key day in the Chilean's appeal trial.

Two “major developments” – according to the prosecutor – should be remembered: no, Nicolas Zepeda did not come to France to visit universities but to see Narumi again. And yes, he did enter the building where his ex-partner was staying, before the fateful evening of December 4, 2016.


A new version accompanied by a promise: “I am here to put everything on the table for you. » A decisive breakthrough for the trial? Only the next few days will provide the answer.

Screams in the night
The court then plunged into the night of December 4, 2016, in the heart of which screams were heard, startling a dozen residents awake. Several testimonies detailed this chilling moment. “It looks like someone is being murdered,” a student wrote by SMS that day at 3:21 a.m. “You could break a person’s arm and they wouldn’t scream like that,” says another says. Screams then silence… “as if the person who shouted was dead” imagines the attorney general.

This Thursday, Nicolas Zepeda risks being confronted with certain contradictions again: the director of investigation is expected to take the stand.

BBM


This live blog is getting longer and longer, reminiscent of the books of Harry Potter. The live blog is good, it is very interesting, and a lot of new details appear, but unfortunately it is undoable to translate it all. So I've skipped what each and every resident had to say about the cries that they heard in that fatal night.
 
Last edited:
L'Est Republicain, live blog day 4

Key points from the fourth day of hearings

First of all, what's not to remember? Saïd Nemeri's out-of-the-blue testimony. The court was quick to forget this bricklayer who conducted his own "investigation", trying to convince the court - after giving numerous interviews to certain media - that the investigators had not taken their work seriously. Nicolas Zepeda's own lawyers put him on the ropes.

The main hearing of the day was dedicated to David Borne, the director of the investigation. It was time for the investigations, the many clues and the scenarios that had been drawn up. After checking, the possible involvement of Arthur Del Piccolo, Narumi's new boyfriend, was quickly ruled out.

The investigators are relying on technology: telephone records, video surveillance, bank details and even the IP address used to connect to Narumi Kurosaki's Facebook account... For David Borne, everything points to Nicolas Zepeda. "Everything that could be verified has been verified," he says. "The one and only suspect is Nicolas Zepeda."

The defence lawyers sought out the slightest detail that might raise doubts. Did they succeed in instilling doubt in the minds of the jurors? No one knows.


BBM


Parts from the liveblog

11:13
The investigating detective faces the jury: the hearing gets to the heart of the matter

In the coming hours, the Nicolas Zepeda appeal trial will gain momentum. David Borne, the head of the investigation, is about to give a detailed account of the investigations into the disappearance of Narumi Kurosaki. This is an essential moment in a criminal trial. The court allows him to rely on his notes.

David Borne had barely begun when Mr Portejoie quickly interrupted him. "You get the impression that he's reading his document, and that bothers me". Was this a minor attempt to destabilise the defence? The real showdown would come later.

With clear phrasing, David Borne continued his monologue unperturbed. The police officer discussed the findings made in mid-December in Narumi's bedroom, where a suitcase, a blanket, her telephone and a sheet were missing. "On the other hand, there was a handbag, a wallet with €565, her computer, her clothes, her only winter coat, her bank cards, her bus pass and her phone charger, which surprised us and led us to believe that she had not left voluntarily."

The white overalls went into action, taking a large number of scientific samples. The Blue Star - which was supposed to reveal any traces of blood that had been cleaned - did not yield any "conclusive findings". Another clarification: "No letter was found that could explain her departure, but her diary showed that she had many projects. A sign, he says, of "an active life".

The police officer took the court by the hand, moving it forward chronologically.


(...)


11.34
The first to be suspected was Arthur Del Piccolo

Arthur Del Piccolo caught the attention of the entire PJ department. "He gave us leads that were unverifiable at the time, told us about a Chilean ex-boyfriend, and talked about details that were a bit confusing and that drowned us. He shows us a chart in which all the last events of Narumi's life are recorded. In fact, he started a proper investigation before the police did".

This behaviour doesn't work in his favour. "This approach is disturbing us and at the moment, no one among the investigators is considering the Chilean lead. As far as we're concerned, it's completely inconceivable that a Chilean national would cross the whole world to harm his ex-girlfriend. We have the impression that he's pushing us to go and investigate Zepeda... We immediately suspect Arthur Del Piccolo".

David Borne invites jurors to put themselves in the police officers' shoes: in cases of this type, we suspect the individual closest to the victim. "He gets dumped on the day of the separation, he behaves in a strange way... There's nothing to accuse him of per se, but we decide to question him, tap his phone and laptop, and bug him. Not a single piece of evidence came to light in any of the attempts we made".

(...)

11:40
"Like in a horror film

David Borne now turns to the neighbourhood investigation. Starting with the terrifying screams of a woman, "just like in a horror film", accompanied by muffled noises that could have been banging against the walls, heard in the student residence and which terrorised those who heard them.

The investigators also interviewed two female students who said that they had also spotted an individual "of European type, black hair, who spoke sometimes in Spanish and sometimes in American" prowling around the hall of residence and then caught on two occasions hiding in the kitchen, notably on the 5th, the day after the disappearance, "his eyes reddened and swollen with tears, looking devastated".

At the same time, telephone investigations showed that Narumi's mobile phone had been pinging on 4 December in Champagney-sur-Loue, Quingey and then in a small village above Ornans. This same phone stopped transmitting on 5 December at 9.23pm. From then on, it would never be active again. But that was the precise moment when Arthur Del Piccolo and his friends were standing in front of the door of the missing student's room...

11:52
From Gustave's table in Ornans to the "Chilean trail

The PJ investigator looks back at the investigations based on Narumi's phone records, which led the police to Ornans the day before she disappeared.

An idea was hatched on the 4th floor of the police station. What if she had gone to dinner in a restaurant? David Borne went round the establishments in the little town on the Loue two weeks later, armed with photos of Narumi with Arthur Del Piccolo ("our only suspect at the time", the policeman recalls). And at Gustave's Table, bingo! The waiter remembers this customer perfectly, but the young man with her at the time was not the one in the photo. "He was European, didn't speak French, and looked nothing like Arthur Del Piccolo," David Borne says.

The bill for the meal was unequivocal: payment had been made using a Chilean bank card. The trail of the ex-boyfriend, Nicolas Zepeda, opens with a bang.


The investigators had another winning idea, to investigate the speed camera on the voie des Mercureaux, a formidable trap for motorists unfamiliar with the area. Once again, bingo! Among the cars flashed was a rented Renault Scenic, hired in Dijon by a certain Nicolas Zepeda, who had booked it on 17 November...

When the vehicle was found, the search turned up nothing. But the next customer remembers how dirty it was when it came back, "with dirt in the passenger compartment, a tear in one of the tyres and grass under the rubber of the wheels".

As the vehicle is equipped with a tracker, a kind of map that works like a telephone, it was possible to geolocate its route "extensively".

12:02
The PJ follow in the footsteps of the Chilean, who buys "5 litres of flammable products".

The Judicial Police also followed the banking trail. Once again, the data recovered enabled Nicolas Zepeda to be tracked, with his motorway tolls and various purchases. David Borne lists them all.

"He bought some very disturbing items at the Toison d'Or shopping centre in Dijon on 1 December. We have a till receipt from Carrefour which tells us that he bought a box of matches, five litres of flammable products and a 4-in-1 bleach-based detergent, Saint-Marc brand. The PJ wants to recover all the video surveillance images from the Toison d'Or. "They are kept for 14 days before being deleted. Our call comes at 2pm and 4 hours later, the videos are automatically deleted.

David Borne continues to track the Chilean during his stay in the region, day by day, sometimes hour by hour, using his phone and the tracker in his hire car. He made a surprising stop four days before Narumi disappeared, in a "remote wooded area south of Dole. It was 4.45pm, it was dark and he had been there for over 2 and a half hours". The investigators later likened this diversions to scouting. It was in this area that they suspected the South American had disposed of the body on 6 December.

Dijon, Ornans, the Doloise region, Besançon, sometimes in the city centre, sometimes on campus. The police know where and when Nicolas Zepeda went.

(...)

12:17
"Irrefutable material proof" that Zepeda took possession of Narumi's accounts

Sitting in his box, Nicolas Zepeda turns round and asks for a notebook and pen.

David Borne launches into the question of Narumi's true-false messages after the night of the screams. The police want to verify the hypothesis of relatives, who believe that "someone has taken possession of her phone and her social networks".

"Two young Japanese women explain that Nicolas Zepeda contacted them to translate some sentences", David Borne continues. Notably this sentence: "I'm going away for the weekend with my new boyfriend, I don't have wifi"... What's disturbing", notes the police officer, "is that these same sentences were sent to Narumi Kurosaki's family after 5 December. Exactly the same sentences."

David Borne continued: "We obtained irrefutable material evidence, because we were able to determine that on 10 December, Narumi's Facebook account was connected to an IP address similar to the one used by Nicolas Zepeda, while the latter was staying with his cousin in Barcelona. The user of Narumi's account is exactly where Nicolas Zepeda is".

As in the trial at first instance, the investigating officer's meticulous demonstration moves like a steamroller over the accused, whose version suddenly appears fragile in the eyes of the jurors. Facing the police officer, many of them took notes... One clear sign: David Borne has their full attention.

12:23
Narumi's purchases after her disappearance

When investigators looked into the purchases made from Narumi's bank account after her disappearance, they were surprised to find a computer address scrambler "even though she was no good at computers". Then there was the Besançon-Lyon train ticket, bought via the wifi in the Toison d'Or shopping centre in Dijon, at a precise moment when Nicolas Zepeda was there! What's more, contrary to Narumi's usual habits, the ticket was not purchased from the SNCF, but from a site frequently used by the accused.

"Narumi never travelled on this train, as the investigations carried out with passengers showed", David Borne explains.

On the computer side, by using Narumi's computer and Google account ("which is a friend of the investigators"), the investigators found that her email inbox was "very well kept until 3 December, all the messages were read, all of them! But from then on, only two were read. Then none.

The user of Narumi's account also made some surprising searches, including for a car wash. Narumi for one doesn't have a driving licence.

12:29
Jealousy, pregnancy and threats... Focus on the tensions in the relationship

David Borne continues his damning account of the accused. Simultaneous translation headphones on, legs crossed, Nicolas Zepeda fills in the pages of his notebook.

The director of the investigation plunged the court into the conversations found between Nicolas and Narumi. "He reproaches her a lot, in particular for leaving for France when he had returned to Japan to find her, behaving in a childish way. He takes back her presents, demands answers in writing, and is very troubling". The investigator was astonished. "She has to respect the rules, and in a break-up message, he attached a link to a Dailymotion video".

The video was deleted, but the police unearthed it. "And then it's terrifying", the investigator describes, "Nicolas Zepeda addresses Narumi on camera and sets conditions to be met, which sound very much like threats".


In Skype exchanges, "Narumi reproaches him for 'knocking her up' and Nicolas never refutes this idea. We haven't been able to confirm or deny this pregnancy, but that's what they say to each other".

David Borne sums up what they said: "It's clear that Nicolas Zepeda is particularly jealous, because he won't accept that Narumi can have male friends in France. He demands that Narumi deletes them". Among them was Arthur Del Piccolo.

(...)

In response to a request, the Chilean judicial authorities forwarded Nicolas Zepeda's bank statements to the PJ. In the weeks leading up to his trip to France, the South American attended a mysterious "behaviour therapy centre". Due to medical confidentiality, the police in Besançon will not know any more.

David Borne also praised the "remarkable work" of the Japanese, "who managed to extract all the data from all the connections in Narumi's computer session at the University of Tsukuba". Nicolas Zepeda connected to it from his own devices. A session that was active even when Narumi was already in France".

For example, when Narumi, in Besançon, wrote to a friend "Did you eat at Yann's yesterday? From Japan, Nicolas Zepeda Googles "Yann Besançon" on Narumi's session.

"In reality, you realise that Nicolas Zepeda has been watching Narumi from Japan. And that he has an obsession with Arthur Del Piccolo, who is having a budding relationship with Narumi in France". Del Piccolo's account has been consulted numerous times from Japan...

13:01
"Easy" to get rid of the body "without being noticed", according to the investigator

With his hands on the desk, David Borne is already anticipating the questions that will soon be put to him... "On a campus, is it possible to remove the body without being noticed? The police officer answers his own question: "It's very easy. At night, there are very few people passing through, so it's very easy not to be noticed. But how? A dead body the size of Narumi can fit into a suitcase, and there's a court case in Savoie where that was the case."

For the police officer, it was obvious that Nicolas Zepeda had prepared his plan. "He had plenty of time to spot all the CCTV cameras and their blind spots, as he spent four days around the residence".

13:09
The fruitless search for the body "We did everything we could"

The police officer talks about the void that plagues all this work: the absence of a body. David Borne details the considerable efforts made to fill this judicial gap: search parties, aerial searches to find possible sources of combustion, the use of drones, helicopters and specialised dogs, water searches, and so on. "We even set aside all the household waste from Greater Besançon in December 2016: 800 tonnes of rubbish were sifted in search of human bones. And nothing", the chief brigadier recalls.

"There's nothing unusual about that in itself. There have been examples in the news recently of bodies never being found or being found with difficulty. The body of little Maëlys would not have been found if the murderer had not indicated the precise location. And why not? Because it had been laid on the ground and there was no organic matter left. Dogs need it to smell it," explains David Borne.

Then there's the possibility that the body was submerged...". If the body was thrown into a river, with all that current... After Dole, there are no more dams for tens of kilometres, so it could have been carried far away", the police officer imagines. Before envisaging another, even more sinister scenario: "We spoke to the fishermen over there, the local aquatic fauna is very aggressive and carnivorous, with catfish capable of eating a body completely."

David Borne agrees that "it's a weakness not to have the body in a criminal case", but takes his reasoning to the extreme: "In this case, paradoxically, it's a strength because it led us to push the investigations to the limit: we had to have the answers to everything. We pushed ourselves as far as we could."

13:10
"Everything that could be verified was verified"

"All criminal cases stir up rumours", says the director of the investigation, before mentioning the case of Saïd Nemeri, who took the stand before him on Thursday morning. "His report was taken seriously, as they all were", continued the police officer. "But we quickly managed to identify the young Thai woman he had mistaken for Narumi. She herself confirmed that she had been with the soldier that day, in the Besançon snack bar where he had met her.

The same applies to the young Korean woman in the Verdun bar-tabac. The reports were 100% verified, with purchase receipts," the investigator points out.

There was also another report of an Asian person in the toilets of a shopping centre... No Asian person appeared on the CCTV. "Everything that could be checked was checked," the chief investigator sums up.


13:12
"The one and only suspect is Nicolas Zepeda".

David Borne approaches the conclusion of his statement. "In view of the evidence, Narumi is dead", he asserts, "she has given no further sign of life. The last time we heard her voice was in agonising screams on the night of 4 to 5 December. She did not leave of her own accord, nor did she take her belongings or her bank cards. We can't imagine that she committed suicide. The only explanation is that she was murdered."

The police officer continued: "Nicolas Zepeda continued to keep her alive on social networks while he was in Europe, but as soon as he returned to Chile on 13 December, no one heard from Narumi Kurosaki. This delayed the investigation. Five days earlier, he would not have been able to get back on the plane, because he would have been identified...".

The conclusion of this long presentation without notes is without appeal: "The one and only suspect that we are able to retain at the end of this investigation is Nicolas Zepeda."

The hearing is suspended. It will resume at 2.15pm. The director of the investigation will then take questions from the parties.


BBM
 
Then I fell ill with a dizzy head and a hazy brain, and many typos as a result, so no complicated translations.
Meanwhile, the trial continued (of course it did) with lots of new details. It was heavier and more detailed than the first trial. Nicolás Zepeda admitted that he did come to France only to see Narumi. Other than that, he proclaimed his innocence. No confession. Nothing about the body.

The Japanese press was largely absent 'because they expected the same outcome.'
They were right.

En direct. Nicolas Zepeda condamné à 28 ans de prison pour l’assassinat de Narumi Kurosaki, suivez notre direct

Nicolas Zepeda sentenced to 28 years in prison

The jury takes its seat... "Mr Zepeda, please stand up. The accused complies silently.

The presiding judge announces the verdict: the Haute-Saône Assize Court finds Nicolas Zepeda guilty of the murder of Narumi Kurosaki. The Chilean is sentenced to 28 years' imprisonment.

The sentence is identical to that handed down in April 2022 by the Doubs Assize Court. Nicolas Zepeda's parents were absent at the time of the announcement. The accused sits motionless, prostrate in his box.

BBM
 
En direct. Nicolas Zepeda condamné à 28 ans de prison pour l’assassinat de Narumi Kurosaki, suivez notre direct


The defence announces that they will appeal to the Supreme Court.


A strange atmosphere pervades the courtroom. Seated, Nicolas Zepeda has disappeared from view behind the rail of his box, his upper body bent forward.

His father, who had been staring at his telephone screen, stands up and approaches his son to comfort him. They exchanged a few words and Humberto Zepeda caresses his hair.

His lawyer, Mr Cormier, confirms that the Zepeda family wish to take their case to the Cour de Cassation, the only court empowered to examine the case again. There is one major difference: these judges are not concerned with evidence of guilt, but only with procedure.

If there is a legal loophole in this respect, the verdict handed down a few minutes ago could be "quashed". A third trial before an assize court would then have to take place... But all this remains highly hypothetical.


BBM

As expected. No doubt they will go to the European Courts after that, because of Human Rights and so on.
 
Defensa de Zepeda presentó recurso para anular segundo juicio que lo condenó


The defence of Nicolás Zepeda, sentenced in France to 28 years in prison for the premeditated murder of his Japanese ex-partner, Narumi Kurosaki, filed an appeal before the Court of Cassation of the European country after the sentence was announced last Thursday.

According to Emol, lawyer Renaud Portejoie filed the appeal within the five working days established by French law after the sentence in the second instance was made public.


This confirmed what the same defence lawyer had said after the sentence was handed down at the Vesoul Court of Appeal, when Portejoie said that "I believe that the Zepeda case is not over".

After the filing of the injunction, the French Court of Cassation will analyse exclusively whether the judicial process was carried out properly and in accordance with the laws of that country, so that the proof of guilt does not weigh during that stage.

In the event that the highest French court considers that there were irregularities in the process, the appeal trial could be annulled to make way for a new one, with all the steps that this entails: other interrogations, new evidence and a new process.

Zepeda's lawyer said that a new trial could take place " possibly within a year".

The sentence received by the Chilean is the same as the one handed down in the first instance in 2022, a hearing held in the city of Besanzon. After this sentence, Zepeda appealed, extending the trial to new courts, which concluded last 21 December with the most recent conviction of the then accused.

During both trials, Zepeda has insisted on his innocence.


BBM
 

@ZaZara


Thank you very much for your development, I read it all. This case has really hit me hard as I myself am a Latin (Mexico). I used to live on these same 9 m2 rooms in France. I myself fell in love with a foreigner whilst studying my master there. Coincidentally about the same semester as Narumi. Like one journalist in France mentioned. This is not the mystery of Narumi, this is the mystery of Nicolas Zepeda's mind.

I hope Narumi's body will be found.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
2,387
Total visitors
2,474

Forum statistics

Threads
602,253
Messages
18,137,579
Members
231,281
Latest member
omnia
Back
Top