It’s not uncommon for movie celebrities to misbehave off-screen and end up facing justice, receiving exemplary punishment. Let’s remember Winona Ryder…
The Gerard Depardieu case has joined this list and received significant media attention, particularly in the European press. In 2021, during the filming of *Les Volets Verts*, he allegedly sexually assaulted a set designer and an assistant director. He was accused of groping both without consent and making several sexually suggestive comments.
In the first half of this year, Depardieu was sentenced to 18 months in prison, had his name added to the French register of sex offenders, and lost his right to run for political office for two years. He was also ordered to compensate the victims and pay fines totaling almost 30,000 euros.
Revictimization
Furthermore, the famous French actor was ordered to pay €1,000 to each of the victims as additional compensation for secondary victimization.
The secondary victimization to which the victims were allegedly subjected was perpetrated by Depardieu’s lawyer. In his eagerness to forcefully defend his client, he attacked not only the victims but also their lawyers through words and actions, showing himself to be so disrespectful, aggressive, and sexist that the court understood that the lawyer ended up causing the victims further harm, stemming from subjecting them to the judicial system for fact-finding and deliberation.
Moreover, the French judicial system seems to have failed to act adequately in similar situations, with the European Court of Human Rights condemning France in a case of the same nature because the judicial authorities failed in their mission to provide “a legal and institutional environment that would prevent secondary victimization, on the contrary, promoting it.”
It is interesting to reflect on how the unethical conduct of a lawyer, during the exercise of their profession, can affect the parties and discourage the pursuit of justice. Or on the irreversible damage that such conduct can cause to all actors in the judicial process, be they the parties themselves, their lawyers, witnesses, experts, etc.
Mariana Ferrer Case
Unfortunately, this case is not unique to the European country. In Brazil, in a hearing held in the Mariana Ferrer case, the defense lawyer adopted an aggressive and offensive posture, asking questions that were considered humiliating and disrespectful to the victim.
The situation exposed a serious flaw in the protection of victims during the trial, which motivated the creation of Law No. 14.245/2021 (Mariana Ferrer Law) precisely to prevent such situations from recurring.
However, the reprehensible practices observed in both cases are not limited to the opposing lawyers. The entire justice system can contribute to secondary victimization by adopting inappropriate postures and procedures that end up intensifying the suffering already experienced by the victim.
Despite the sad and, why not, recent reports, the Brazilian judicial system, at least in the criminal sphere, has been seeking ways to prevent secondary victimization for some time now.
The Maria da Penha Law, for example, guarantees the right to specialized and humane care, ensures the protection of the victim’s physical and emotional integrity, and seeks to prevent the unnecessary repetition of reports of violence.
In the same vein, the CNJ (National Council of Justice) has been acting through resolutions and institutional programs that reinforce this same concern, creating guidelines for assisting victims, focusing on qualified listening, respect for dignity, and the prevention of embarrassing practices.
Symbolic progress
These initiatives represent important advances in building a more sensitive justice system. But it is still not enough.
The approach remains limited to the criminal sphere and lacks a structured public policy that recognizes and prevents secondary victimization in a broad way, involving all branches of law.
It doesn’t take much effort to conclude that secondary victimization can occur in civil, labor, administrative proceedings, or any other situation where the victim needs to submit to institutional structures that, instead of supporting them, generate embarrassment, discredit, and humiliation.
Therefore, it makes no sense to restrict this concept only to criminal proceedings. The recognition of secondary victimization should be directed at the justice system as a whole, demanding ethical conduct from all legal professionals, with clear mechanisms for prevention and redress, in any procedural context or sphere.
The Depardieu case, specifically, starkly illustrates how violence against the victim can be perpetuated within the justice system itself, especially when offensive conduct is normalized under the pretext of exercising the right to a full defense, but it should also be seen as an example to be followed. The conviction of the actor and his lawyer for victimization secondary action represents an important symbolic advance, as it recognizes that the judicial process can no longer be an instance of pain and humiliation for those who have already suffered, whether in the Old World or anywhere else on this planet. Furthermore, we need to maintain civility as the rule.
Consultor Jurídico, Conjur, February 18, 2026, 5:17 PM
