Extract
[...] These exceptional jurisdictions are composed of judges chosen for their competence and loyalty to the king. On this model, Louis XIV creates in 1679 the Chambre ardente, entrusted to La Reynie, already involved in the affair of the Marquise de Brinvilliers15. This jurisdiction, installed at the Arsenal and independent of the Parliament, therefore functions as an exceptional court with an accelerated procedure and extended powers of investigation. The first investigations rely on police reports, interrogations, and minutes related to the poisoning activities attributed to Voisin. [...]
[...] From a repressive point of view, the text establishes a regime of unprecedented severity. Any attempt, even without effect, is punished with death on the same footing as successful poisoning. Denunciation becomes obligatory under penalty of sanction. The death penalty does not only target the authors of the crimes, but also those who manufactured or distributed poisons, considered not as accomplices, but as fully responsible individuals. By hardening repression and more strictly regulating the use of toxic substances, the 1682 edict closes a period of judicial uncertainty and begins a more rational approach to the crime of poisoning. [...]
[...] The creation of a special commission to bypass ordinary justice The affair breaks out in 1679, after the arrest of several Parisian poisoners. Court personalities are implicated by these women, sparking fear of a state scandal. Louis XIV then decides to intervene directly and not let the ordinary judges instruct the case14. In fact, as the source of all justice, the king can delegate its exercise and remove a case from the ordinary judicial process by a right of 'evocation', a prerogative that allows him to transfer a case to a specific jurisdiction. [...]
[...] The trial of the Marquise de Brinvilliers, a codified justice, but still adaptable If the trial fits well into the codified criminal procedure established by the August 1670 ordinance it is put to the test by the extraordinary nature of the case A. An affair judged according to the 1670 ordinance despite its exceptional nature After the Middle Ages, the transition from an accusatory procedure to an inquisitorial procedure, accompanied by progressive codification and a stronger intervention of the king, marks an evolution towards modern law. [...]
[...] Quickly, in view of the damning elements, a first condemnation by default is pronounced, the marquise having fled to England and then to the Netherlands. As is customary, her effigy is executed in her absence.6. When she is arrested in 1676 in Liège, her extradition to France allows the procedure to be resumed at the stage of the definitive investigation. This key moment in the trial highlights the importance of confession in criminal procedure and illustrates the theory of legal evidence, the cornerstone of judicial procedure at the time. [...]
