The session on the 12th May had as its focus the testimony of the biometrical expert who had been called as a witness by the prosecution. Firstly, she stated that the quality of the images (of the security cameras on the ground floor of the bank, where the safe is) was very bad and that they have a very low resolution, which affected the biometrical examination.
Concerning the physiognomy of the body, it was not possible to determine the silhouette, nor the height, nor the form of the head due to the clothes the people appearing in the images were wearing. Referring to the face of the woman, she stated that it had only been possible to compare the features of the lower half of the face, in which nothing “outstanding” matched; there were a few parts which could coincide but these are very common in many people, which is why it is not possible to say whether it concerns the same person or not. Concerning the man who appears in the video, the features coincide even less. According to the expert, the accused and the man in the video are not the same person.
The session continued with new “proof” brought to court by the prosecutor. A “witness” who supposedly would have travelled with one of the accused by BlaBlacar on the same dates as the robbery. This (French) woman works for a company that sells tools of the same brand as some of the tools which were found in the bank, something which the prosecution considers an indication.
Again, the prosecution refused to explain how they found this witness (who, by the way, refused to give a statement in court), since the investigation remains open and the prosecution does not allow the lawyers access to this part of the file. Finally, the prosecution crossed out some parts of the file, and has given this part of the file to the lawyers.