jcjeant & roulishhollandias,
Thanks to both of you for the explanations.
I knew the French law was significantly different from English and US law. One thing, when you say "penal", what does that mean? Is it the same as what I would call "criminal"?
This French system is known as inquisitorial, as opposed to the adversarial system used in Common Law legal systems. In this instance, the judge who is appointed to the case is in charge of preparing the case and assessing whether it should come to court. In the US, this would be decided by a Grand Jury of citizens where the prosecution presents enough evidence to ask the Jury to indict the defendant/defendants. The Jury decides if the evidence presented is adequate to send the case to a trial.
Does the judge consider this?
"There is no felony or misdemeanour in the absence of an intent to commit it.
However, the deliberate endangering of others is a misdemeanour where the law so provides.
A misdemeanour also exists, where the law so provides, in cases of recklessness, negligence, or failure to observe."
In the case as referred to in the above paragraph, natural persons who have not directly contributed to causing the damage, but who have created or contributed to create the situation which allowed the damage to happen who failed to take steps enabling it to be avoided, are criminally liable where it is shown that they have broken a duty of care or precaution laid down by statute or regulation in a manifestly deliberate manner, or have committed a specified piece of misconduct which exposed another person to a particularly serious risk of which they must have been aware. (From French Law)
It will certainly be interesting to see how this all unfolds. It is different than the Concorde case in several ways...
