Police judiciaire (France)

The Police judiciaire (France) is the investigative institution that turns the accusation against Alexandre Farel into a formal criminal inquiry. Through officers’ actions and testimony, the novel follows the passage from complaint to arrest, evidence gathering, and courtroom scrutiny. Its procedures produce a record of events, but they do not resolve the central dispute over whether the sexual encounter was consensual.

Initial Inquiry and Arrest

Three officers arrived at Alexandre’s father’s apartment while Alexandre was alone. After confirming his identity, they told him that a young woman had filed a complaint accusing him of rape. Alexandre denied knowing what they meant. The officers’ arrival interrupted an ordinary moment—he had been running on a treadmill—and immediately placed him inside a formal investigation.

During questioning, Alexandre described having attended a party with Mila Wizman, the daughter of his mother’s partner. He said they had gone outside together and that sexual contact had occurred, while denying that they had had intercourse. The investigator explained the sequence that could follow a complaint: repeated interviews, medical examinations and sample collection, forensic analysis, and, where evidence or suspicion warranted it, police custody. The explanation made the investigation legible to Alexandre while also emphasizing that custody was not arbitrary in the officers’ account.

Interviews and Evidence Collection

At the first recorded interview, the director of the investigation showed Alexandre a photograph of Mila, whom he identified as someone he knew. He again denied intercourse but acknowledged that he had ejaculated after she performed oral sex, which he said she had done willingly. Investigators took genetic samples and photographs before returning him to his cell pending a further interview. The contrast between his account and the physical evidence became a central feature of the case: the existence of sexual contact could be tested, but its circumstances and character remained disputed.

The investigation also included obtaining and assessing Mila’s account. She came to a police station in Paris with her mother the morning after the incident and reported that Alexandre had raped her. The investigating director testified that Mila appeared deeply distressed. On the basis of her statement, the police arranged medical examinations, sent a team to inspect the location she had identified, and searched Alexandre’s parents’ apartment after he had been identified. Officers found the yellow underwear Mila had described, arrested Alexandre, and conducted an identification procedure behind one-way glass, during which she immediately identified him.

Forensic results confirmed that sexual intercourse had taken place. Toxicological analyses showed that Mila had consumed alcohol and cannabis and that Alexandre had also consumed intoxicants, including cocaine. The medical expert who examined Mila later confirmed that she had been in a state of panic and had vaginal injuries that could be consistent with forced intercourse. These findings established relevant circumstances for the court, but did not by themselves settle the disputed question of consent.

From Investigation to Courtroom Testimony

At trial, the director of the investigation described the complaint, the initial interview, the medical referral, the inspection of the location, the search, the identification procedure, and the forensic findings. Her testimony presented the inquiry as a chain of procedures through which Mila’s account was recorded and checked against other forms of evidence. Asked whether investigators had reason to doubt Mila’s sincerity, she said they had found no basis for doing so.

The defense lawyer questioned the investigating officer about inconsistencies, particularly whether a knife had been present. The exchange shows how investigative material could be revisited in court: the same file that had guided police action became a subject of adversarial scrutiny. The officer’s testimony and the medical evidence supported the prosecution’s account, while the defense challenged aspects of the complaint and the interpretation of the events.

Institutional Limits and Narrative Significance

The novel distinguishes between establishing that sexual contact occurred and determining whether it was consensual. The investigation produced interviews, samples, medical findings, and a physical search, yet the lawyers and the court continued to confront uncertainty about the encounter and Alexandre’s intent. The investigating officer could describe what Mila reported, what the police did, and what the examinations found; the central legal and moral judgment remained for the trial.

The institution is also shown through the unequal positions created by procedure. Alexandre’s early denial and the officers’ explanations belong to the police-custody setting; Mila’s complaint enters the record through interviews and examinations; and confidential investigative material later reaches Claire through Léo, who warns that possessing it must remain secret. At trial, those gathered materials are reinterpreted before a public audience. The Police judiciaire (France) thus functions not as an all-knowing source of truth but as the institution that gathers and organizes evidence whose meaning remains contested.