00;00;09;15 - 00;00;36;03

Hi, I'm Jonathan Hafetz, and welcome to Law on Film, a podcast that looks at law through film and film through law. We look at what legal issues films explore, what they get right about the law and what they get wrong, and how law is important to understanding the film, as well as what the film teaches us about the law and about the larger social and cultural context in which it operates.

00;00;36;06 - 00;01;07;09

Jonathan Hafetz

This episode we look at the Goldman case, the process Goldman from 2023, a French courtroom drama based on the real life 1976 trial of Pierre Goldman, a far left Jewish militant who was accused of multiple armed robberies and four murders during a holdup of a pharmacy in Paris. The film, which was directed by Cedric Kohn from a screenplay by Kohn and Natalia Hertzberg, stars Aria Walter as Goldman and Arthur Harari as his lead lawyer, George Zimmerman.

00;01;07;12 - 00;01;41;28

Jonathan Hafetz

It's not only a gripping account of this celebrated trial, but the movie also explores larger themes around individual and collective responsibility, the way courtrooms can become a battleground for contested narratives about the past and the swirling forces of race, class, religion in 1970s France. Joining me to talk about the Goldman case is Fred Davis, an internationally acclaimed trial attorney, expert on French criminal law and procedure, and lecturer at Columbia Law School, where he teaches about how to examine comparative criminal procedure through film.

00;01;42;00 - 00;01;47;00

Jonathan Hafetz

Fred, it's great to welcome you back on law and film to talk about the Goldman case.

00;01;47;02 - 00;02;05;09

Fred Davis

Well, it's a pleasure to be here. I can't tell you how much I enjoyed this movie. You and I have talked about a few French movies before, and notably anatomy of a fall, which got an Oscar last year and then earlier a film in English called chorded. And of the various French films that come out in the last few years about trials.

00;02;05;15 - 00;02;18;02

Fred Davis

This is in some ways the best. I mean, it just really recapture the crackle of an actual trial in France. I I've watched it now three times, thanks to you're sending me the link to it and just enjoyed it every time.

00;02;18;05 - 00;02;45;25

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah. It is, it's, just a really incredible film in terms of giving you insight into both French criminal law, criminal procedure especially, and into this fascinating, fascinating case which, you know, until the film. I saw the film and we started talking about the podcast I had known a lot about. So I think before we talk about, you know, what happens in the movie in the courtroom, I'd be good to give a little background on Pierre Goldman, who he was and what the trial was about.

00;02;45;27 - 00;03;11;25

Fred Davis

Well, Pierre Goldman is a highly unusual even in France, but in some ways he's very French, too. He was born in 1944. His parents are Jews who emigrated from Poland and became, very active in the resistance during the war. And then he kind of he had an odd childhood growing up. But he kind of drifted into radicalism in the 60s in the way other French people did, and kind of caught the revolutionary fervor.

00;03;11;27 - 00;03;37;23

Fred Davis

For example, he idolized Che Guevara and Fidel Castro and actually spent quite a bit of time in Cuba and then spent a year living with guerrillas in Venezuela. And when they needed money, he would rob a bank. So in the 70 late 60s, he ends up back in Paris and basically is kind of a lefty guy who says stuff, you know, he would do writing, but he also did break ins when he needed money.

00;03;37;26 - 00;04;00;19

Fred Davis

And so what happened, at the end of the decade, is there were three break ins and one of which, as you mentioned, is some pharmacists were killed. And he goes on trial in which he admitted the break ins, the earlier ones, but stoutly said, no, I didn't kill him. I wouldn't do that. And so, very briefly, the trial history was he was convicted in the first trial and sentenced to life in prison.

00;04;00;25 - 00;04;20;25

Fred Davis

It was affirmed on appeal, but the Supreme Court of France vacated it, possibly based in part upon his memoirs that he wrote while in jail, which had a number of sort of things in it. And so what we watch in the film is the retrial that takes place outside of Paris, in the town of Mia in 1976.

00;04;20;28 - 00;04;33;08

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah, that was the memoir, the translation. I think it's something like obscure recollections of a Polish Jew, which is what he wrote while he was in jail, which garnered a lot of attention on his case and, as you say, probably contributed to the retrial.

00;04;33;10 - 00;04;53;29

Fred Davis

Yeah, the actual titles, the Obscure memories of a Polish Jew born in France. And it really said quite a bit about who he thought he was and situated in part, you know, his life and this in this film in terms of some of the issues going on relating to class, relating to politics and also relating to, you know, the Jewish presence in France.

00;04;54;01 - 00;05;11;27

Jonathan Hafetz

The way the film starts, it has, you know, some of the background that you elaborate on in terms of the procedural history, what happened before and then before we get to the courtroom, which is really where virtually the entire film takes place. We have this scene where he's looking to dismiss his main warrior, George Sherman. Right.

00;05;12;01 - 00;05;15;07

Jonathan Hafetz

That's sort of the opening of the. That's where the opening of the film, if you will.

00;05;15;09 - 00;05;35;02

Fred Davis

Yeah. The opening of the film is about 5 or 6 minutes. Just a fascinating dialog between his two principal lawyers. One of them is George Couchman, who's a fascinating man. He died last year, and I knew him some. I, he and I worked on a case together ten, 15 years ago. He, like, Goldman was born of Polish Jewish emigrants.

00;05;35;02 - 00;05;55;04

Fred Davis

So he's about ten years older. He emigrated before. And one of the issues is the difficult relationship between Cushman and Goldman, possibly because they're too much alike him. And they shared sort of this background. They're both prickly people and his junior lawyers. A guy named Frances, shot a key. And the opening scene they're referring to is a dialog between the two of them.

00;05;55;07 - 00;06;18;22

Fred Davis

When Goldman had written a letter to keep on firing him. Sure. A key is still alive and his daughter, Sarah Shawki, is a very, very prominent, French lawyer who quite spectacularly, is now a senior prosecutor in England. But these were prominent lawyers. Cushman went on to have an extraordinary career. He was one of the great lawyers in France, and he advised presidents and prime ministers.

00;06;18;22 - 00;06;45;27

Fred Davis

He was very involved in the history of, of the Shoah and of the Jewish experience. During the war. He got involved in some litigation. So for that he also represented, you know, the celebrities. He was Polanski's lawyer in France and was involved in Sarkozy's divorce and stuff like that. He was an amazing lawyer. But that that dialog between the two of the beginning really sets the stage for kind of the personal level at which we're going to explore this trial.

00;06;45;29 - 00;07;04;03

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah. You said there maybe they're too much alike. And the differences over the trial strategy, which we can talk about, it does seem like it. And I'm not sure if that's right. But we're kind of catching German at the earliest stage of his career, as is a very big case. And as you said, he kind of goes on to these heights and these other very prominent cases.

00;07;04;06 - 00;07;21;29

Fred Davis

Yeah, he was, I suspect, pretty well known because of the number of people who supported Goldman. He probably had access to, you know, a number of lawyers. So it wasn't like he was a beginner, but he didn't become you sort of a really well known, celebrity until later. And the relationship between the two of us just absolutely fascinating.

00;07;22;05 - 00;07;41;07

Fred Davis

There's one fabulous scene where Goldman is talking too much as viewed by his lawyer. So something about the police are racist. And so you to get something says, Your honor, I think what he really means is that some police officers are racist. Not that all of them are. And he says, no, I mean, all of them are. So he you know, the guy who spoke for himself.

00;07;41;09 - 00;08;01;17

Jonathan Hafetz

Goldman boys, what seems like a lot for, you know, attorney to handle it comes up multiple times in the film as one of those fascinating aspects of the film as well. So we talked about the procedural history. So just to kind of set the stage in terms of the courtroom, how it worked in terms of prosecutor, the victim's lawyer, that is, lawyer for the party, civil defense, and the jury.

00;08;01;17 - 00;08;15;09

Jonathan Hafetz

So because this is you look at this and it looks like a trial, and I think in some ways maybe a little bit more familiar than to American audiences, then anatomy of a fall, but I'm not sure it looks very different. So tell us, you know what's happening in the courtroom generally?

00;08;15;11 - 00;08;35;04

Fred Davis

Well, it's a jury trial. He could have been sentenced to death. The death penalty we may talk about was still in effect. And in fact, that year, France executed almost pretty much its last, people. So he's entitled to a jury trial. And the trial begins when they say rise for the court. And in walk the three judges and the nine jurors.

00;08;35;07 - 00;08;57;05

Fred Davis

And back then, slightly different now, back then, a jury would consist of nine laypeople and three professional judges, all of whom would deliberate together, and they walk out together and are all seated on the same level. So you see the three judges, the jurors do either side. There's also the prosecutor, who controversially, is physically at the same level as the judges.

00;08;57;10 - 00;09;15;20

Fred Davis

Some people refer to that as the carpenters mistake because, many people view prosecutors just another party shouldn't be differentiated in that way. And then off to kind of the right as we see it in the, camera is the the Da. Goldman was in custody. I mean, he had been convicted, so he was brought in under in handcuffs.

00;09;15;22 - 00;09;37;04

Fred Davis

And then right in front of him are his lawyers. Then off to the left are a number of lawyers. But one of the most active participants is a lawyer named Randy gecko, who is the lawyer for the victims. And in the French system, victims qualify as parties to a criminal case. I mean, just like a prosecutor's like having another prosecutor.

00;09;37;11 - 00;09;58;13

Fred Davis

They can cross-examine, they can appeal. And Garrow, who's played by a wonderful actor, is very, very active in the trial. And he almost more than the prosecutor is going after. Cashman is going after Goldman and makes really quite strong statements about what a terrible person both of them are. Really. And then there's three judges. Only one of them speaks, and he's pretty good.

00;09;58;13 - 00;10;15;28

Fred Davis

I think we don't have a transcript of the trial, but that's it's pretty realistic. And then interestingly, the jurors are there and they're allowed to ask questions by themselves. And one of them says to Goldman, when he refuses to answer a question, a guy says in a nice way, we're trying to find out what happened. You know, tell us what happened.

00;10;16;03 - 00;10;20;03

Fred Davis

And that's coming from a juror, which sort of couldn't happen in our system.

00;10;20;06 - 00;10;39;25

Jonathan Hafetz

Another thing that's different is the trial starts. Or one of the first parts of the trial is Goldman standing up and being questioned by the judge. And I think one of the issues that comes up is whether he wants to introduce character witnesses or not. And Goldman says no, because it's not relevant to whether I did it or not.

00;10;39;27 - 00;11;04;23

Fred Davis

Yeah. The beginning of the trial, we saw this a little bit in other cases in the in the Army in the quarter to the movie, you and I talked about before, the same thing happened. And it's classic French and different from ours in two ways. One way is at a trial. The accused is expected to say what he or she knows, and it's entirely normal for the judge to turn to the accused, sitting there and saying, you know, I want to hear from you.

00;11;04;24 - 00;11;22;00

Fred Davis

What do you say? Did you do it or not? The other thing that is very important to the French criminal justice system is they treat a criminal trial as being about the person in his or her entirety, so that with this case, trial began with and is often the case is they'll turn to the accused, say, tell me about yourself.

00;11;22;02 - 00;11;42;09

Fred Davis

And then what happened here is the judge read from the record about how he grew up. Now as a film that helps you and me, because we're learning about Goldman as the judge recites it. But that's classic French. Namely, we want to know who this person is in order to judge him or her. And as you point out, Goldman is wonderfully played.

00;11;42;09 - 00;11;50;14

Fred Davis

I just thought the guy was great, just kept pushing back, saying, that's irrelevant. You know, I want to talk about the facts because they all show I'm innocent. And this is nonsense.

00;11;50;17 - 00;12;08;14

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah, exactly. And so he says, like, I don't want to have why do I need character witnesses? It's not relevant to whether I did this or not. Right. Even though it might make sense of style strategy. So basically the trial proceeds. There's a number of witnesses who were questioned by various sides, including Jerome, the attorney for the victims.

00;12;08;16 - 00;12;13;10

Jonathan Hafetz

Any notable aspects of these various examinations during the trial?

00;12;13;16 - 00;12;35;24

Fred Davis

Well, to an American viewer, it all looks a little bit chaotic for several reasons. One is that questioning and cross-examination happens, sort of, you know, almost randomly. I mean, the lawyers stand up and talk. The witnesses are allowed to introduce hearsay. They're allowed to give sort of, you know, opinions on what they heard from somebody else. There really no formal rules of evidence.

00;12;35;26 - 00;13;06;26

Fred Davis

This one, there was some real cross-examination. I mean, some of the witnesses were witness ID, you know, witnesses who identified them. And Couchman, you know, did a good job at creating a doubt as to whether they really saw the guy. There was a lineup issue that would be classic to an American situation where he had been picked out of a lineup, and he insisted that he just jumped out because what they did is they got 5 or 6 cops to show up, in the lineup, all of whom were clean shaven.

00;13;06;29 - 00;13;32;23

Fred Davis

And he hadn't slept overnight and he hadn't shaved. And so what Cashman did is he took a photograph of his client size and asked the cops to show up in trial, and then put this photograph in the middle, and he just jumps out at you. So it was a bad lineup. So there's a lot of yes, sir, good classroom drama in terms of flagrant testimony, flagrant speaking objections.

00;13;32;26 - 00;13;36;10

Fred Davis

The lawyers are all over the lot. And some, some real lawyering.

00;13;36;13 - 00;14;06;24

Jonathan Hafetz

And there's a lot of I think. Yeah, excellent cross-examination of some of the witnesses who saw Goldman or allegedly saw him fleeing this really good examination. I think they're kind of credibility. And in that respect, I think it does maybe look familiar to a US audience. On the other hand, as you said, and as we saw An Anatomy of a fall, although more anatomy of a fall is this kind of rapid fire questioning, it's not like one side goes and the other side, it's a way that, you know, multiple people or sides will speak up during testimony of a particular witness.

00;14;06;26 - 00;14;26;24

Fred Davis

Yeah. That's actually also another thing that is interesting is how active the people in the audience were. And there were people there on both sides. I mean, a number of people would burst into applause when Goldman would say something particularly trenchant, but they're also people who supported the victims. And I want to play one of them, you know, yelled out, he's an assassin.

00;14;26;26 - 00;14;42;00

Fred Davis

And then at one point, a police officer who's in the back, he's not sort of a witness. He hasn't been sworn in. The stands up, says what he says is false. I mean, so here he is in the audience testifying in a sense as a cop. And then it goes back and forth saying, you're a liar. You're a liar.

00;14;42;00 - 00;14;45;16

Fred Davis

I mean, it it is kind of out of control by American standards.

00;14;45;19 - 00;15;00;09

Jonathan Hafetz

I mean, the film that, you know, in a sense, some of those scenes in those outbursts reminded me of. And also, you know, when you talk about some of the attention this case garnered in the media at the time is The Trial of the Chicago seven a little bit with a lot of the kind of some similar dynamics.

00;15;00;09 - 00;15;22;25

Jonathan Hafetz

Right. The trial of the Chicago seven, for protests at the Democratic National Convention, Chicago, that in 1968. But, you know, for this it was a really, I think, a window into the kind of France at the time and a snapshot, a lot of the kind of conflicting forces and dynamics. Do you get to see it as kind of, you know, it's a kind of window into what was happening in France around then.

00;15;22;27 - 00;15;42;28

Fred Davis

Yeah. If you were to ask kind of, what's the high level takeaway, really, what does this film tell us? In part it, you know, it shows an American audience. What a trial is like. Which was not particularly news in France when you and I talked about, anatomy of the fall. I made the point, to me, at least, that that wonderful case wasn't about a trial so much as about the human condition.

00;15;42;28 - 00;16;07;02

Fred Davis

Really. The trial was a window into the relationship between a husband and wife. I think that Kahn made this movie to go back to the 1970s. Relatively few people in France remember that period themselves. And to me, there are at least three historical references that put this trial into context and would be apparent to a French audience. One is the 1968 student revolts.

00;16;07;07 - 00;16;29;07

Fred Davis

They had a outpouring, their barricades in the street, you know, a lot of violence, we did in our country, too. I mean, the Vietnam War, but theirs was different. And it kind of created this notion of the revolutionary left, in France, oddly, Goldman themselves did not participate in the 68 stuff. He actually got criticized by some of its leaders.

00;16;29;14 - 00;16;51;26

Fred Davis

And actually, in the movie, he talks about what a bunch of jerks they were, but that was the context in which he was sort of famous for being part of that revolutionary event. This was, the trial sort of had the death penalty in the background. He could have been sentenced. The death penalty. France was among the last countries in Europe to actually execute people.

00;16;51;26 - 00;17;17;09

Fred Davis

People were executed that year and it was abolished a few years later. His lawyer kinsman had, I believe, a role in the abolition of the death penalty. The death penalty was really pushed back by two lawyers who died relatively recently. Robert bet on terror and LeClaire Andre LeClaire. Heisman was very close to the president of France who came out against the death penalty.

00;17;17;12 - 00;17;48;11

Fred Davis

And that was sort of brave because the polls favored the death penalty then, and I'm absolutely convinced that he would not have done that without Cashman's support. So we have the 68 stuff in the background. We have the death penalty, sir, on the way out. I think the real really interesting context is, you know, kind of the Shoah, the, the way the, the Jews were treated in France during the, occupation, which was very, very real to Couchman, very, very real to Goldman.

00;17;48;13 - 00;18;17;03

Fred Davis

And the time period is very interesting. One way to look at it is 1976 was halfway between two major events, namely books written by a Columbia, history professor named Robert Paxton, who's a friend of mine, and he is credited in France to this day with opening the way France looked at its history during the war, and in particular the history of Jews during the war in 1971 or 72, that is.

00;18;17;03 - 00;18;42;07

Fred Davis

Shortly before this trial, he wrote his first big book, which is a political history of, Vichy, which basically pointed out that the Vichy regime was more French than the French really like to think. The French tried to pass it off as basically puffers for the Germans and not really French. And he pointed out the French really invested in Vichy, and the Vichy government had a bigger impact on French society than people liked.

00;18;42;10 - 00;19;06;01

Fred Davis

And that was sort of an uneasy thing for the left and the right in France during the 70s. So that was kind of part of the background discussion. And then a few years after this trial, he wrote his most amazing book called Vichy France and the Jews. And what had happened is that when the all went into France in August of 44, he amazingly successfully created this notion that the past is past.

00;19;06;04 - 00;19;42;20

Fred Davis

The 2 or 3 traitors have all been, you know, shot. We've taken care of them and everybody is left is kind of we're all happy. Resistance, fighters. And neither he nor the Jewish community made too much about what had happened. And Bob's 1972 book, I'm sorry, 82 book on Vichy France and the Jews, showed that the anti-Jewish measures were in many ways very, very French and went beyond, in many ways, what the Germans insisted on and led some years later to the president of France, Chirac, many years later, saying publicly our country committed genocide.

00;19;42;23 - 00;20;04;12

Fred Davis

The nation of France committed genocide. So here was a, you know, a prominent Jewish defendant, represented by a lawyer who himself came from that background. And there's references in the trial to, you know, his Jewishness and other racial issues. And we see a lot of black people in the audience and their sort of racial issues that came up during the trial.

00;20;04;12 - 00;20;15;05

Fred Davis

But I think that the slow reawakening in France of looking at their history, particularly with respect to the Jewish population there, Frances, an indelible part of the background.

00;20;15;07 - 00;20;48;03

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah. I think that's so fascinating, Fred. I mean, you know, some of it looks familiar to you know, you said to us audience is kind of 1968, period student revolts, revolutionary fervor playing out in the courtroom and in that sense, there's this kind of, link with The Trial of Chicago seven, for example. But you also have this overlaid on exactly what you described, I think, which is the fact that this was the trial, that implicates memory, you know, collective memory and treatment of, Jews in France during the Holocaust, during World War Two, and then after.

00;20;48;03 - 00;20;54;02

Jonathan Hafetz

And there is, as you said, they all kind of collide, in a sense, in this trial over this Pierre Goldman.

00;20;54;04 - 00;21;14;06

Fred Davis

Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, that was very much a in evolving issue in France. And I think today's audience in France, and certainly the United States would find that new. I actually, you know, was alive back then. And actually the 1968 student revolts had an impact on me in an odd way. So to me, it was kind of interesting.

00;21;14;09 - 00;21;33;01

Fred Davis

I was living abroad at that time. And then much later, I advised the French government on their remaining Holocaust claims at the end of the century, and worked with the Jewish communities and the French communities and the American government to come up with a and, you know, trying to put that to bed. But, you know, it's a history of history in a sense.

00;21;33;01 - 00;21;40;17

Fred Davis

I mean, the history of how France looked at itself immediately after the war. There's been a lot written about it. And you see it in this film, you see.

00;21;40;17 - 00;22;02;27

Jonathan Hafetz

It also, too, I think, in dialog in relation between Kingsman and Goldman, part of it's over a different trial strategy. Right? The key pun wants to put the best events on when the case. Right. Or at least, you know, avoid the death penalty. Goldman is just much more about, you know, he's going to stand on principle. I didn't do it, and I'm not going to make kind of concessions just to try to get out of it.

00;22;02;27 - 00;22;17;14

Jonathan Hafetz

In terms of a trial strategy, like with I'm not going to put on character witnesses and the few other things he does in the film. But I think there's also like a, yeah, some sense there's some difference in terms of how they or at least the strategy relates to how they view their Jewish identity and their their place in France.

00;22;17;14 - 00;22;19;29

Jonathan Hafetz

I don't know if that occurred to you in that way.

00;22;20;01 - 00;22;38;25

Fred Davis

Yeah. I think the big difference was that Kingsman and Ricky, were lawyers and they, you know, we're working, in a sense, within the system. I mean, they were respectful to the judge. They're trying to get their, client to shut up. When are you saying, you know, outrageous things? And, you know, we're trying to do what lawyers do, namely, you know, do their best for their client.

00;22;39;02 - 00;23;00;13

Fred Davis

And, you know, Goldman, who, as I say, is just amazingly portrayed by this guy worked alter, you know, to him, it was just, you know, a living event, namely part of his life. And he'd written about this in prison. And here, in a sense, he's been given his best audience is too bad he didn't know about this film because, you know, in a odd way that he died many, many years ago.

00;23;00;18 - 00;23;04;10

Fred Davis

This film is kind of his ultimate testimony in that sense.

00;23;04;12 - 00;23;27;14

Jonathan Hafetz

Absolutely. And you say, you know, in terms of the students, you know, attract the attention of students. I think you mentioned also, I mean, why support among prominent on the the left intellectuals, politicians, artists, Sartre, Simmons and Uri Ionesco, the playwright, the poet Louise Aragon, former prime minister Pierre Mendez, France were all kind of rallied to Goldman's side.

00;23;27;18 - 00;23;49;12

Jonathan Hafetz

At the same time. I think someone who's written about the case in Donald Read as a piece says there was all this support among intellectuals and prominent Jews, but there's a slight disconnect. Maybe, as he says, he wasn't a Captain Dreyfus. I mean, Goldman himself was something of an unsavory character, right? He was involved in, you know, he's had drifted from leftist causes into basically criminal activity.

00;23;49;18 - 00;23;55;22

Jonathan Hafetz

So is he kind of an interesting vessel for a lot of these larger issues to be, you kind of explored through.

00;23;55;24 - 00;24;18;07

Fred Davis

Yeah. Interesting comparison to Dreyfus affair. I mean, Captain Dreyfus was, in fact a boring soldier. I mean, there's really nothing particularly heroic about him in terms of, himself. His problem of that he was Jewish at a time of raging anti-Semitism in France and was just a convenient scapegoat for, screw ups. So he became sort of a hero in spite of himself.

00;24;18;10 - 00;24;47;18

Fred Davis

I don't think there's really an implication in this movie that he was pursued or prosecuted, because of his religion or his background. What comes across is that the prosecutor and the victim's lawyers, you know, people did die. I mean, people were killed. And there was some real testimony against this guy. I mean, flawed but real. And so I don't think it was a political prosecution in the way that the Dreyfus case was, but it just happened to give this guy, kind of the audience that he was desperate to have.

00;24;47;22 - 00;25;13;03

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah, exactly. It wasn't a political prosecution. It was a these were violent crimes. There were four murders. There was certainly some evidence, whether it met the burden, you know, the standard to convict government, given some of the flaws of the or shortcomings. Nevins. Another question, but yeah, I agree with you, but in a sense, everyone's rallying behind this guy, the left and the student left, the intellectual left to rally behind this guy who's, you know, certainly committed a bunch of armed robberies and maybe committed these murders.

00;25;13;10 - 00;25;23;27

Jonathan Hafetz

So that's. Yeah, I think, something of a disconnect, these sort of benefits from some of this, some of these larger issues. You know, France's history in World War two, in collaboration with Germany and Vichy France.

00;25;23;29 - 00;25;54;11

Fred Davis

Of the people you mentioned, all of them other than Mendes France, have this kind of, addiction to the chic left. We talked about limousine liberals. The French have this notion of, the caviar left, and it was kind of cool back then to engage in, among other things, anti-Americanism. You know, this is during the Vietnam War, when we look like, you know, ogres and, you know, racist, the Braves, a philosopher and a bunch of people, you know, looked at Che Guevara, who himself as a murderer, as far as I can tell.

00;25;54;13 - 00;26;14;19

Fred Davis

But he had this flair to him. Fidel, in a funny way, had his flair. I mean, so there was this kind of romantic connection with an old fashioned the left. And there's also the Communist Party. I mean, Goldman was a little active in the Communist Party, don't forget. You know, they were in some ways a hero. Maybe a major hero in the Second World War.

00;26;14;19 - 00;26;50;04

Fred Davis

I mean, they they got conflicted because of the Soviet pact with Hitler. But when the resistance really got going, in part because they were underground, you know, they were very, very effective and were leaders of the resistance. And they had a big impact after the media, after the war, when, frankly, our country saved them. I mean, you know, from D-Day on, you know, the United States and the other allies really liberated France, but they immediately had this sort of anti-American level to their political discourse that continues to some degree to this day, but certainly was evidence in the 1960s, in part because of Vietnam.

00;26;50;10 - 00;27;02;29

Fred Davis

So there was this, you know, sort of romantic lefty group that were willing to at least tolerate and, you know, smile or look the other way at people who went over the line in terms of stealing and even violence.

00;27;03;02 - 00;27;25;25

Jonathan Hafetz

And you see that with respect to Goldman and also, I think with respect to the police more generally, I mean, you you alluded to it. There are aspects of some racial elements in terms of particularly, I think, the way they treat one of the witnesses who was Goldman's alibi. Right. And you can see some of the, tensions around not just religion, anti-Semitism, but around race as well in the film, although they are certainly in a, in a, in a lower key, I think.

00;27;26;00 - 00;27;43;28

Fred Davis

Yeah, there were a number of black people show up on screen. He, Goldman had spent quite a bit of time in Cuba and elsewhere in the Caribbean and hung out, you know, Caribbean groups in France. So they were his buddies there, at least two black witnesses who testified, who explicitly said they were forced into saying certain things by the cops.

00;27;44;01 - 00;28;04;01

Fred Davis

And at least in one of the instances, people in the, you know, in the in the audience reacted to that. But, you know, by that and that was very much, you know, over the moment. I mean, though, that specific kind of racism within the police and as we mentioned, a few minutes ago, you know, Goldman absolutely believe and said several times, you know, the police are out to get me because of race.

00;28;04;08 - 00;28;07;06

Fred Davis

You know, I'm friendly with black people. They don't like that.

00;28;07;09 - 00;28;18;15

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah. That felt, in some ways also quite current about the film and some of the way those issues around, you know, race in the courtroom are those fucked up very much, you know, not just 1976 but 2024. Oh, yeah.

00;28;18;15 - 00;28;40;17

Fred Davis

And then there's anti-Semitism. I mean, I don't know this, but I'm, you know, I can only believe that come in part made this movie just because of what's going on in France right now. I mean, you know, there's some scary stuff going on in France. And here, I mean, elsewhere, I mean, they're not the only ones, but I, you know, and it's important when you're looking at a sensitive issue like that, including racism and anti-Semitism, to really understand where it comes from.

00;28;40;17 - 00;28;44;07

Fred Davis

And this movie, I think, helps understand that in France.

00;28;44;09 - 00;28;46;12

Jonathan Hafetz

Was there anything else about the trial?

00;28;46;15 - 00;29;03;29

Fred Davis

Now, if you look at the trial as a whole and we don't see the entire trial, but we see so much of it that you really I think it a sample of the different kinds of witnesses and how they were treated. You know, it shows the French use a victim's lawyer. This guy was so active. That's something that wouldn't happen in the United States.

00;29;03;29 - 00;29;26;13

Fred Davis

The absence of formal rules of evidence and kind of procedural regularity of, you know, the prosecutor interviews a witness and and says, I'm finished your witness. And then the defense does, I mean, the whole free for all atmosphere and the way the French look at it, they're there to find out one thing, and that is what happened. And so for them is perfectly appropriate for the judge to turn to Goldman and say, look, you were there.

00;29;26;13 - 00;29;45;25

Fred Davis

I wasn't. And that's in fact one of the jurors, I mean, I thought was really an eloquent thing when a juror kind of sheepishly and politely turns to Goldman saying, look, we're just trying to understand what happened here, and we're not getting in unless you share with us what you can tell us. So all of that, I think, is sort of embedded in the French notion of criminal justice.

00;29;45;27 - 00;30;03;13

Jonathan Hafetz

Right. And implicit what you're saying, the absence of the right of the privilege against self-incrimination, there's an expectation that the defendant will speak, provide testimony, other information to get at the truth. And when we talked about chorded and anatomy before the French movie, you talked about the importance of the the dossier, the case file.

00;30;03;16 - 00;30;26;07

Fred Davis

Well, any case that goes to a jury trial and in fact, any serious case, even if it's not a jury will be looked into in the first instance by an investigating magistrate. We didn't see the investigating magistrate here. In Anatomy of Fall, we see him briefly. And it's really a fundamental, different approach to criminal justice. The investigating magistrate is not a prosecutor.

00;30;26;10 - 00;30;50;02

Fred Davis

He or she is told to find out what happened. The phrase in their code of criminal procedure, the magistrate should use all means available to establish the truth, and that means that he or she looks into what happened, interviews, witnesses, and is really responsible equally to the victims, to the accused, once he or she is identified and the prosecutor.

00;30;50;02 - 00;31;14;24

Fred Davis

So when I talk to my American, our friends, I say, what do you think life would be like if the grand jury were available to you as a defense counsel, namely, that you have exactly the same access as the prosecutor to what the grand jury looks into. So the magistrate looks into this stuff, gets the views of the various parties, and then will have made essentially a preliminary finding that binds the defendant over to trial.

00;31;14;28 - 00;31;41;18

Fred Davis

And so a trial begins when a judge, namely an investigating magistrate, has already found that there's evidence that the person did it. And one can ask, is there really a presumption of innocence when the judge is trying the case? If it's just a judge trial already know that. I think the answer is that, you know, it's just been stretched out where once the defendant or the accused was given access, that's his time to sort of have an adversarial impact on it.

00;31;41;20 - 00;31;50;22

Fred Davis

And so it's not unfair from this point of view at trial and say, look, everybody is on the same page. You know, as much as the prosecutor does. What's your story.

00;31;50;25 - 00;32;02;26

Jonathan Hafetz

In this movie? We just kind of telescope or zoom right into the trial and leave out the various aspects of the work done by the investigating magistrate that would have led up to that, that we saw, for example, in anatomy, before.

00;32;02;28 - 00;32;22;24

Fred Davis

We saw a little bit in the anatomy phone. There's some older French movies where the investigating magistrate is a real focus. There's a wonderful movie where Jacques Brel, you know, the famous Belgian wonderful folk singer, plays a kind of heroic investigating magistrate, you know, goes through all sorts of, efforts to find out the truth of what happened.

00;32;22;26 - 00;32;43;08

Jonathan Hafetz

So let's talk about the verdict. Goldman. The spoiler alert is acquitted of the murders he had admitted to the robberies. He's given, I think, a relatively but in the US might seem a relatively light sentence and then eventually gets out. But let's talk about what. What did you think of the verdict? And then what happens after to Goldman?

00;32;43;10 - 00;33;02;28

Fred Davis

Well, this is a jury trial. They're jury trials are really different from ours in that there are three judges and nine jurors, as we mentioned, and they all deliver it together. And so there would have been 12 of them, the three judges and the nine lay people around the table. Every American who I mentioned that. So how can you possibly have a judge sitting there in the in the jury room?

00;33;03;05 - 00;33;28;12

Fred Davis

One way to look at it is that the judges convey what the law is, not by an hour or two hour long set of instructions that you and I are familiar with the judge reads at great length. You know, a lot of stuff that's heavily edited and looked at, but at arm's length. The judges convey what the lawyers, by sitting around the table and looking at the jurors, you know, face to face.

00;33;28;14 - 00;33;50;25

Fred Davis

That's not irrational. It may not be something that we'd ever do, but it's not totally irrational. They announced at the end that he is, convicted of the break ins and then acquitted of the murders by a majority of eight votes. Majority of eight votes. What I think that means is there are 12 jurors. Three of them are judges.

00;33;50;28 - 00;34;10;08

Fred Davis

The notion is you have to have eight to convict. The notion of that is that if the three judges convict, we have to have majority, namely five out of the remaining nine. And it doesn't necessarily mean that that was the actual vote. I think what the judge was saying is, it reached that threshold and all three of them, there's a difference between then and now.

00;34;10;11 - 00;34;36;20

Fred Davis

Then a jury verdict was simply guilty or not guilty, right? Sort of like ours in 2010, the European Court of Human Rights came out with a case called text Cat Out of Belgium, where they reviewed a system more or less like ours, where the jury simply says guilty or not guilty. And they said that does not comply with the European Convention on Human Rights, because we don't know what the basis for their decision was.

00;34;36;20 - 00;35;02;00

Fred Davis

We don't know whether they applied the law right or wrong. So since 2010, all the countries in Europe, including France, a verdict including a jury verdict has to be explained. So if that were to happen today, the judges would then write off what the basis for their decision was so that that can be reviewed on appeal. But back then, you know, the jury verdict was, you know, what we heard, namely by a majority of eight convicted acquit.

00;35;02;03 - 00;35;07;05

Jonathan Hafetz

And there was no appeal in this case. The prosecution decided to not to appeal. Is that correct?

00;35;07;06 - 00;35;27;29

Fred Davis

It was appealable. Apparently they didn't. The prosecution can and fairly often does, appeal an acquittal. Very oddly, in a jury trial, if they appeal an acquittal, there's an appellate jury, oddly enough. And that didn't happen here. You know, probably because it's just been around too long and they just didn't want to do it anymore. And he also had by then served five years in prison.

00;35;27;29 - 00;35;36;11

Fred Davis

So when you say you got a fairly light sense, it was five years time served. And I don't know the answer, but I can well imagine they decided not worth pushing this any further.

00;35;36;14 - 00;35;43;24

Jonathan Hafetz

And so then, well, what happens in his next chapter? It's kind of an interesting, somewhat murky story in and of itself, right?

00;35;43;27 - 00;36;03;16

Fred Davis

Well, it's kind of weird. I mean, he was murdered a few years later, point blank range on a Paris street. Some three people walked up to him, just killed him. And no one's ever been convicted of that. And there's all sorts of murky, as you put it, controversy. Some of the witnesses said that the assassins looked like they were Spanish, whatever that means.

00;36;03;19 - 00;36;27;18

Fred Davis

And there's a theory that a right wing Spanish cabal got to them. And then there's other theories, but who knows? I mean, but but the point is, he was, pretty promptly murdered, and presumably by the right wing. I mean, he was just such a, you know, such a fly in the ointment. I mean, he just was out there saying, he kept talking about the revolution, and a lot of people didn't like that.

00;36;27;21 - 00;36;35;11

Jonathan Hafetz

And so the other and the other players, each man goes on to the prominent heights. You talked about any other next chapters for any of the people in the film?

00;36;35;14 - 00;36;52;05

Fred Davis

Well, the three most prominent lawyers all went on to become even more prominent. I mean, Cage Mom became a real player in France, so I don't think he was ever elected to anything. But he served in the Ministry of Justice. He advised presidents and prime ministers, and he advised celebrities and one of his wives, a very beautiful French actress.

00;36;52;05 - 00;37;13;20

Fred Davis

So he became sort of a celebrity himself. Francis Sharkey is now retired, but he had a very active practice, I believe, in many instances representing, you know, lefties in general. And then Guero, who's the lawyer representing the victims, continued to be very active. He was sort of a little bit right of center. I mean, he was definitely not a lefty.

00;37;13;23 - 00;37;33;10

Fred Davis

And there's a little bit of controversy about how right wing he was, but he was very, very, very prominent lawyer. The others I don't know what happened. I mean, you know, one never knows of a judges in France. I mean, there's there's not a single French judge of whom. Any biographies really have been written. I mean, they're all trained to be anonymous compared to ours.

00;37;33;13 - 00;37;35;17

Fred Davis

So what happened to the judge? I don't know.

00;37;35;19 - 00;37;37;18

Jonathan Hafetz

What was the public reaction to the verdict?

00;37;37;21 - 00;37;54;04

Fred Davis

I don't really know. I've looked a little bit. It was vividly followed. I mean, you and I remember O.J. Simpson. We were all on the edge of our seats. And when that verdict came down and the O.J. Simpson case, you know, created a lot of controversy about justice, we looked at what happened. And, you know, that happened in France.

00;37;54;04 - 00;37;58;12

Fred Davis

I can't remember any particular prominent person talking about it.

00;37;58;14 - 00;38;09;07

Jonathan Hafetz

And today, how is the film kind of reverberating in France? Is it sort of attracting kind of attention about, you know, this past this case and the history that is embedded in it?

00;38;09;09 - 00;38;29;07

Fred Davis

Well, I can tell it's been, popular or not hugely popular. Anatomy of a fall really sort of hit. I don't know, you know, had a reaction over here for the Oscar, but also over there. And I read a lot of lawyer comments about anatomy of a fall, because a lot of lawyers felt that to some degree, it did that in many ways.

00;38;29;07 - 00;38;51;12

Fred Davis

It did not reflect actual criminal procedures. I've seen less commentary. I've been looking fairly carefully. I've seen less commentary in the French lawyer press about the case, other than how interesting it is, but I don't. I've yet to see anybody who kind of criticizes it in terms of how it portrayed the actual trial or French criminal procedures.

00;38;51;14 - 00;39;20;11

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah. Really does. I think an amazing job telling the history and the procedure and it's it's fascinating. Like you're talking about you have anatomy of the fall, which was celebrated Academy Award winning by popular Saint Omer, another French movie critically acclaimed from a few years before looking at a French trial involving the death of a young child. It seems like there's an uptick in French courtroom dramas and suggesting that, you know, you can make not only very good, very entertaining movies about the civil inquisitorial system.

00;39;20;14 - 00;39;41;24

Fred Davis

Yeah, I mean, there's a history of that in many countries. And, you know, I've talked about some of the others, but there's a history going way back to some miscarriage of justice trials and others in France. And I think what's different is that the, the ones we mentioned, Santamaria courted and now they may have fallen as well as this one are kind of big movies.

00;39;41;24 - 00;40;00;27

Fred Davis

I mean, they're movies that are, you know, Oscar qualifying or at least, you know, run in that crowd, which indicates to me that it's kind of reached a level of public interest. There's also, you know, we have here all sorts of TV specials, and the Brits are wonderful at TV specials that involve, you know, cops and robbers, but also trials.

00;40;00;27 - 00;40;25;03

Fred Davis

And there's some in France as well. There's a wonderful series some years ago that in English is called spiral. It's called Longer and Irish. The actor played the, victims lawyers is a major figure in spiral, but it shows the life of the police, the prosecutors, the defense counsel, the politicians and the court in a way that just really brings it to life.

00;40;25;03 - 00;40;39;28

Fred Davis

And that was mesmerizing to me, but also a French audience. So, yeah, look, there is a commonality. We're all interested in our trials. Trials reveal something about ourselves and about our culture. And I think this is one of the really better examples of that out of France.

00;40;40;01 - 00;40;42;21

Jonathan Hafetz

Barabbas, or anything else you wanted to touch on that we hadn't.

00;40;42;23 - 00;41;11;05

Fred Davis

To me, the most important thing when seeing the film is to realize the evolving state of public discussion about France's history in the Second World War, in particular its treatment of its Jewish population. 75,000 French Jews died during the war because of being hauled off. The history was not black and white. It was more gray than anything else in terms of how the French really reacted and dealt with it.

00;41;11;11 - 00;41;37;05

Fred Davis

There's some good sides to that. The percentage of Jews in the Netherlands that did not survive the war is much higher than in France, partly because of geography, but partly because of, you know, what some French people did. And it just has been a very interesting study to see the French evolving awareness and dealing with that. And this film took place sort of in the middle of that evolution.

00;41;37;07 - 00;41;54;05

Fred Davis

Like I said, it was after Bob Patton's first book talking about Vichy as a political phenomenon, just before his second book, talking about Vichy France and the Jews. And to me, more than anything else, it's that history that we're seeing through a microcosm, through the film.

00;41;54;07 - 00;42;17;09

Jonathan Hafetz

Yeah, the film really gives you insight into that history as it played out in that time and its kind of compelling characters. Goldman and the attorneys, and just a real insight into the dynamics of a fascinating French criminal trial. So I, you know, I think it's a wonderful movie, and I would certainly encourage anyone who wants to learn about kind of this history and also learn about French criminal procedure to see it.

00;42;17;09 - 00;42;20;26

Jonathan Hafetz

It's a I mean, it's a really great watch, I think an important movie.

00;42;20;28 - 00;42;37;24

Fred Davis

Yeah. It's also just so well-made a man, anybody who speaks even moderate French, I mean, just the the verbal facility of a Goldman and his lawyer and the others. I mean, it's just like a travelog through everyday French engineering. So how they express themselves just brilliantly done.

00;42;37;26 - 00;42;47;14

Jonathan Hafetz

And the performances too, I think area works out there as Goldman, Arthur Harari as human or just, and everyone else in the cast as well, but are just really terrific.

00;42;47;20 - 00;43;05;18

Fred Davis

Yeah. And the wide range of them, I mean, Kingsman, Goldman, Shawky and the whole are all fairly prominent roles. You know, this is the accused and the various lawyers involved, but there are some short witnesses, you know, two of whom were people of color, who, you know, spoke from that perspective of what they perceived the life to be like.

00;43;05;24 - 00;43;24;24

Fred Davis

The cops. I've done a lot with French cops. And and it just kind of captured what it's like to sort of, you know, be a French cop or to be a French witness of color hauled into a trial like this after all these little vignettes. And I thought the acting of done by actors I never heard of, many of whom don't even have Wikipedia links.

00;43;24;24 - 00;43;26;27

Fred Davis

It's just brilliant. Just brilliant.

00;43;26;29 - 00;43;40;23

Jonathan Hafetz

Well, Fred, it's been great to have you on to talk about the Goldman case, which I think we both admire greatly as a film. And to have you back just to talk about French criminal law, criminal procedure, history, and French cinema as well.

00;43;40;26 - 00;44;07;26

Fred Davis

Yeah. If I can make a short pitch for the world I'm kind of living on, I teach a course, as you mentioned, at Columbia, on comparative criminal justice. And more than anything else, I believe that lawyers out there, I mean, people you and I know, Jonathan, it's worth realizing that what we passionately believe is our system of justice in all its magnificence, our jury trials, our adversarial system, our fearless prosecutors are fearless defense counsel.

00;44;07;29 - 00;44;35;13

Fred Davis

Many of the principles that we find to be normal is viewed by the rest of the world as kind of abnormal and kind of wrong. In many ways, the power that a prosecutor has in our country is something that is not the case in France and in much of Europe. So I'm really encouraging everyone to look at this film and and others around the world as part of what you're doing, Jonathan, which I think is really terrific, in part just to look at how the rest of the world looks at our criminal justice system.

00;44;35;16 - 00;44;45;00

Jonathan Hafetz

And the different ways that different countries approach these same questions. Not say one's better, one's worse, but different and valuable, you know, in their own right. And so I think that comes across in this movie.

00;44;45;03 - 00;44;46;26

Fred Davis

Yeah, it does very much so.

00;44;46;28 - 00;44;49;18

Jonathan Hafetz

Well, Fred, thanks again for coming on. Always great to have you.