Off Air... with Jane and Fi - Skipping revision for Crossroads and Corrie (with Stéphane Babonneau)

Episode Date: February 17, 2026

Fi’s still off, so Jane is holding down the fort, with some help from Eve ('fresh' from Berlin). There’s more discussion about revision, fear of failure, the eccentricities of Berlin, and Jane’s love of work (and Smash Hits). Plus, Jane speaks to Stéphane Babonneau, the lawyer to Gisèle Pelicot. Gisèle’s book is called 'A Hymn to Life: Shame Has to Change Sides'. Our next book club pick is 'A Town Like Alice' by Nevil Shute.Our most asked about book is called 'The Later Years' by Peter Thornton.You can listen to our 'I'm in the cupboard on Christmas' playlist here: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1awQioX5y4fxhTAK8ZPhwQIf you want to contact the show to ask a question and get involved in the conversation then please email us: [e-mail] us on Instagram! @janeandfiPodcast Producers: Eve SalusburyExecutive Producer: Rosie Cutler Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Let's go. Have you got your microphone up? I've got my microphone up. She's back, everybody. I mean, so a genuine concern about whether Eve was going to be back in one piece from her weekend revelries in Berlin. Because when I talked to you about it on Thursday,

you were definitely six out of ten about this whole venture. I was a bit nervous. Yeah. You don't even sound that croaky. I'm a bit disappointed. Well, I've had all of Monday to recuperate. How do I think? feel about Berlin out of 10 as a place, maybe a seven.

Oh, God. I hope there are no German listeners, a bit of shade there. Seven out of ten, people rave about it? Well, people rave in it. Yes. And I did do a bit of rave thing. Right, okay. It was very, very cold.

What was it really? A little bit bleak. Berlin would be cold in February. Well, I thought that it was kind of similar to London. Really, did you? I pack some thermals, but... Not enough. Because you get out of the Uber

and it's kind of like, oh, let's go and see the gate of the city. A Brandenburg gate. But you can't stand outside for long. Immediately, it's like, right, let's sack this off. Oh dear. To go and find a bar. Culture lover, Eve, there,

sacking off a trip to some of Berlin's major sites because it was a bit chilling. I did go when I was a bit younger on a school trip. Oh, well, that's all right, then. That's all right. And when you say raving, just, I mean, This is a genuine question. What does that actually mean?

So it means kind of banging your head. Yeah, they're big on the techno music. And I said to Rosie that maybe that's what I haven't lost my voice. You can't really sing along to techno music. So there wasn't really much use of my voice. It's not the doleys, is it? So what do you just kind of... Just kind of jerk about it.

I don't like techno music particularly day to day. You wouldn't really catch it in my... Spotify wrapped. But when you're there, I think you're more inclined to get into it. So I did actually quite enjoy it when I was there. And how does it work with the thermals? This is what really interesting me. You have the thermals on in the queue for the club. Yeah. And they have very comprehensive cloak rooms. But because they're quite strict on the dress code, they'll ask you to sort of pull your thermals out and have a look at what you're wearing underneath to understand whether you've fit the dress code.

What is the dress code? Minimal. Just minimal. It's quite minimal. Yeah, some of them are really strict to the point where my friend who's a boy actually... You've got a friend who's a boy? He's one of the girls. But he had to take his trousers off. Did he really? Because he didn't fit the dresser.

So he had to just walk around in his boxes and his top. I don't understand this either. I'm really sorry. It's such a relief to be middle-aged or indeed slightly beyond it when I hear stories like this. It was quite an experience. And also, they make you hand your phones in. at the cloakroom because of the dress code. So that was, obviously, that's quite a positive thing

for the people are abiding by the dress code. Yeah, it's also just good to get away from your phone, isn't it? It was quite a weird experience, because I'd reach for it thinking that maybe it had been stolen, and then I'd have a moment and realise that it was just in the cloak room. And tell me just about the romance of being reunited with your phone. It was special, wasn't it? It was really special.

It's quite disorientating, because then you've got no idea what the time is. If you lose your mates, you've just got a... submit to the vibes. Oh my God, it sounds absolutely awful. It's hedonistic. Well, there we are. Those of us who have never done it and never want to do it,

do at least know someone who's done it, and that's Eve, and thanks very much, and thanks for telling me about it. And I will not be doing it again. Excellent. Okay, you've reached exactly the right conclusion. Now, let's get to it and discuss some of the emails. We've got quite a few on the subject of,

do you remember the email we had last week, Eve, about the mom who was really worried about her son and his A-level? Yes. Okay, so an interesting response to this. Stephanie is in Leeds. To the listener whose son is struggling with A-level revision, please don't give up or lose heart. My son went into the six-form, hated it, failed his AS levels and was then not allowed to return for the second year. I was distraught, but he amazed me with what followed. He grew up almost overnight.

He independently enrolled on a two-year computer course at a local college. That gave him a qualification equivalent to three A-levels. That allowed him to apply for a degree course at uni, which included a year out in industry. He got a first-class degree and now works at the place where he did his year out. That's the result, is he? Incidentally, after one year, he was earning more than I did after 35 years in teaching. Wow. A-levels aren't for everyone, nor is university. What can appear disastrous initially might be just the thing to kickstart the rest of your life.

Stephanie, thank you for that. I think that's a really positive contribution to the debate. This is from another listener who says, let me get to the meat of this email. I'd like to respond to your correspondence recently for help with her teenage son's apparent lack of motivation to revise for A-levels. I am a university lecturer. Firstly, I noticed that neither you nor fee picked up on what was to me a key clue. His mother noted he was having mental health issues and was seeing. a counsellor. Now that could span a whole range of things from feeling slightly anxious to at the other end of the scale, full-on schizophrenia. But let's assume he's not in a good place. Coupled with the fact

that he'd been predicted high grades and had underperformed in his mocks, shouldn't that ring alarm bells that he isn't doing well mentally? I think to put pressure on him to revise could be the worst thing she could do. In fact, it could be downright dangerous. Perhaps the first port of call would be to sit down with him and talk about how he's feeling. I think in fairness that was what Fee suggested may be considered the involvement of a medical professional. A levels really aren't that important in the great scheme of things. His life is worth far more than a couple of exams.

Would you put pressure on somebody with a cancer diagnosis to knuckle down and stop procrastinating? Well, no, you're quite right, we wouldn't. I hope this helps, says our correspondent. By the way, I got straight A's at A's. level and I went to Cambridge. I'm one of those people who can do exams. But I was lucky to have not been pressured by my parents, but allowed to find my own way of working. In brackets, very little, she says. You're just clever, anonymous. And well done to you. Listen, I'm in awe

of it. How fabulous. This is from another anonymous listener. I think there's a bit of detail here, so we probably don't need to mention the name. I was sent right back to 1997. I was sent right back to 1997 by that email and a stressful few months as our son simply refused to knuckle down to any preparation for his A-levels. He was so bright and he'd done pretty well in his GCSEs without making any effort. As he progressed through the six-form, teachers started to sound warnings that he needed to make more effort. Knowing with him that it would be counterproductive, apart from a few gentle nudges, I did try to hold off nagging and reading the riot act for many, many, many weeks but one day I just couldn't hold it in any longer and I screamed at him will you go up to

your room and at least pretend to do revision as I couldn't bear to see him ruining his life well it probably didn't help that his younger sister was doing her GCSEs that year two and was studiously organising herself with revision cards highlighters and past papers what a contrast well I have to say that this is a generalisation are you ready for it eve go for it I think in some cases you do get with teenage girls that propensity to have the highlighters and the revision cards. I mean, I'm speaking with some personal experience. Not me, but my own children certainly did do that.

And to my shame, I used to be hauled off into the bedrooms to help them with revision and fire questions at them. And I did do it, Eve, but if I'm honest, not with that much enthusiasm. I would sort of get the highlighters and the revision cards, but then I just spend my days shuffling them and organising them without actually doing anything. I can understand that, again, with some students, that is. It makes you feel better to colour code things,

but really you can sometimes not be doing that much. I hope people are learning from this. Anonymous goes on. 29 years later, my son is still resentful about all this and he blames the school, me and everybody but himself for the outcomes. He did manage 3A levels with average. grades, but I know he could have done better. After leaving school, he drifted into low-paid jobs way below his intellectual capabilities for many years, but finally found something that grabbed

his interest and is now running his own successful wine importing business. I knew there'd be an upside. Looking back, we now think he probably has undiagnosed ADHD, which just wasn't a thing when he was a child. But I think it stopped him from being able to organise himself and focus. You could well be right. Thank you for that suggestion. And actually a lot of people have put very, very thoughtful emails together on this subject, but I think those three cover just about everything. Certainly ADHD could well be a possibility. Yes, it might be a serious mental health issue. I obviously very sincerely hope it isn't. And then we had the positive one to start. That you know what? Education exams, that whole process, sometimes you just want to get off the treadmill.

and as our first correspondent said, her son did brilliantly under his own steam, applying for a college course which suited him down to the ground and he's thrived ever since. So anyway, I hope all that helps. What were you like? What was I like? I just didn't do a lot of work, not because I didn't need to, but because I did get very easily distracted by playing my coloured vinyl, rearranging my smash-hatch collection and just gazing out of the window a lot.

There's a lovely view sometimes. Well, yeah, in suburban Liverpool, yes, it often could be. I'm just thinking, no, I wasn't, I definitely wasn't clever enough to do no work, I just wasn't. I needed to do some, and I needed to work particularly hard for my maths, as it was then, O level, because I was so aware that if I didn't pass that, I'd be in such deep doo-doo, because you couldn't go to university without an O-level in maths. That was my one as well. And did you put the hours in on that, because I really did.

I had a similar sort of tension with my mum. I feel like sometimes when your parents are worried that you're not doing what you should be doing, you can fill them in the corner with an eye on you. And then so sometimes I would kind of fuff about all day and then I would stay up quite late into the night because it was helpful for me to not have my mum breathing down my neck. So then I was actually doing the revision.

So you did do it. I did do it, but it wasn't very helpful because sometimes it would be during exam periods and I was staying up to 2 or 3 a.m. doing the revision quite late, so I left it quite last minute. But it was more helpful to me to have the house to myself and quiet. And not to be watched over. And also then there was less distractions because no one's on their phones, on the group chats.

So there's kind of later hours. You see, we didn't have that. Easier for me, yeah. All I had was the written word of my music to distract me and the radio. That was all I had. I didn't, I mean, if I'd had the phone, God alone knows, whether I'd done the work. And you can have in group chats

or your friends reassuring you that they're also doing no work. So then you're in it together. Yeah, but they lie. On the day, people have lied and they turn up absolutely fine. So you can only really look after yourself in that situation.

I'm interested that you worked at night because I can be absolutely honest about this. Even as a student at uni, I didn't work late into the night. I just thought, at school, I'd never work beyond eight. In fact, usually half seven because Coronation Street was on at half seven. And I'd get in from school.

and I'd do a little bit and then it was crossroads and then we had our tea. So I just wasn't a studious type but that's not to say I didn't need to work because by God I did. But I've enjoyed the world of work more than I enjoyed education if I'm honest. You do come to work with a springing a step

and a smile on your face. Yes, just take note of that. Well listen, I do mean this when I say I've never had a job that is just, it's great. Isn't that nice? Sometimes you've just got to be grateful. And I am. Is it because of me?

No, not really. Sue says, I was really worried. I nearly crashed my car. Oh, God, Sue. When we were talking about fee moving house. Don't worry. This is not, she's not leaving the country, is she? No.

She hasn't told her if she is. Well, she's away this week because it's half of time. But it's not, no, there's no need for anyone to panic. Sue says, I need you both. I can't face the modern world. Trump, Epstein, Andrew Mandelson, I just can't face these appalling men without you. Please reassure me, stroke us. Love the flex shampoo, gloriously perfumed.

And thank you to the listener who ranted at the Royal Family's silence on Andrew's behaviour. Yeah, I agree with you on that one, Sue. And you do feel that at some point they're just going to have to be just a bit more out there on it. Interestingly, I did watch the BBC interview, the Newsnight interview with Giselle Pelico, and I should have said earlier that Giselle Pellico's lawyer is a guest on this podcast coming up in a couple of minutes' time.

Well worth hearing, very interesting man. And if you feel that you can't take too much of the detail and you might think I don't want to be reminded of all that, just actually in that conversation, there isn't an enormous amount of detail about the horrific ordeal that Giselle Pellico went through. It's really about how he felt about working with her and other aspects of that case.

which rightly has shocked people all over the world. It was interesting in that Giselle Pelico interview on Newsnight and she does come across brilliantly, I have to say, what a woman, that the Queen, Camilla, had written to her, which is a lovely thing to have done, expressing her sympathy and support. And I noted that and it was at the end of that conversation that she had on Newsnight that it was noted and she said how pleased she'd been to receive the letter.

And I do not doubt the sincerity of Camilla there. I don't. But it does make you think, you know, come on. Maybe she could write to her brother-in-law. Anyway, that really is beside the point. Anonymous says, I'd like to touch on the subject of family estrangement that was raised briefly on our fair on Thursday. That was in the conversation with the novelist Jenny Godfrey,

who was a great guest, and who has been at periods of her life estranged from members of her family. Our correspondent says, as the grandmother who's not seen my cherished but troubled daughter or my beloved grandchildren for more than two years, I'd appeal to people to see the complexities that lie beyond family breakdowns. There can be no more painful or crippling experience than a sudden and complete severing of these bonds.

And there is often a powerful imbalance that leaves older adults much more vulnerable to the effects. It's not always related to poor parenting or serious harm, which no one could do. deny, does sadly, do sadly happen. In many of these families, other factors are at play, including mental health disorders or the potentially malignant influence of a new partner, for example. A dismissive, there must be faults on both sides, or no one makes such a choice to cut off family without serious cause. These very prevalent views do not lead to the heart of it

or to any real understanding, but to further wounding and isolation. For parents, at grandparents of adult children who make the choice to sever ties, this often leaves in its wake wrecked lives. I'm so sorry for that listeners genuine trouble. That is a horrible thing to have happened. And as you say, sometimes there isn't an obvious reason. Obviously, as you also acknowledge, sometimes there is. It must be just so awful. So thank you for sharing that experience, which cannot have been easy. This from Kate, who says, wonderful off-air team. Oh.

Yeah, thanks, Eve. I'm feeling a bit delirious going back. Even though she did have that day in bed yesterday, she's still not quite on it, is she? I keep having moments today where I was looking for my past for ages. It was just in my hand. Right. It's just the laugh.

You should bottle it on the end, prescribe it's on the NHS. Kate says, I don't expect this email to be read out. Well, I'm just reading it out. But to Fee and Jane, I just wanted to say how much I like the fact that you both protect your children's privacy on the pod. Yeah, well, obviously, I don't think we've ever named our children. I mean, their names are out there, I should say. But I think we both feel very keenly that we've chosen to do this podcast. Our children certainly haven't chosen it.

And although we talk about them and about living with them and about some of the things they do, and indeed, let's be honest, some of the younger generation's habits, which don't always suit our. particularly my way of life. By the way, I wish that lad would turn up and take his speakers. I don't want them in my hall anymore. Anyway, all of that stuff, we do reference it, but we don't give too much away, and I would never do that. Kate says, I've written and rewritten this email several times,

as I do think it's a sensitive topic. I don't judge others for sharing their kids online or in the media because there simply isn't any education on it. When you have a baby, the hospital sends you home with some pamphlets on starting solids. and settling a newborn, but nothing on how to protect your child's privacy in a rapidly changing digital world. The matter is currently front of mind as I wade into the world of early childcare and enroll my daughter in a nursery. Yes, I can box check and request to keep her off their social media and out of their parent communication systems, but how do you stop other parents

photographing your child at social events and later posting to their own social? It's a good point that, isn't it? How do you? I don't know. Some people you see on Instagram who choose to put emojis. They pixelate. Yeah. They put a big emoji over the children's faces. But there's no way you can make sure everyone's doing that. No, and as we know, some people quite literally make a living out of bringing up their child. Yeah. I mean, look, I make a living out of talking a lot and often about myself.

So I'm on thin ice. I was going to say that before you did. But our listener goes on, Kate, also simmering in the background is the fear that a school's data management system will be hacked, something we adults are suddenly used to now. But that does feel particularly cruel when the victim is so young that they're still crawling and in nappies. This isn't a slight on early childcare centres as all organisations are battling this. I truly believe one of the greatest gifts we can give our children in this day and age is their privacy. I'm 100% with you Kate and it is troubling and you do wonder whether in the decades ahead

someone who perhaps has been monetised by a parent I don't know you might have seen them learning to walk or whatever it might be could end up in quite a senior government position for example I feel like we're even seeing it slightly play out now with the Beckhams because Brooklyn Beckham

just he's now saying he never wanted this he never asked this and he felt like he was constantly being used as a PR opportunity. He's born famous. Yeah, and he never chose that and now he's rejecting it and look where it's got them. Well, yeah, that's very true. And that situation is, I think we can say it's not resolved, is it? Not yet. Well, that's another family estrangement and I'm not mocking it because it's crap, it must be absolutely dreadful. We can't hide the fact that this is a relatively serious addition to the podcast because of the content you're about to hear and it's just

worth bringing in Josie who says, Hi, Jane, Fee and Eve, I've been thoroughly enjoying the podcast recently. Your reviews of Marty Supreme and the odd episode of a place in the sun. Always make me chuckle. I haven't seen a place in the sun this week. I must change that tonight.

The interview with Vicky Ward was fantastic. Now, Vicki Ward was the Vanity Fair journalist, wasn't she? And that went out as a Friday extra podcast the week before last. Correct. So it's still available. And she was really good. Joe is right. I completely agree with all the sentiments that have been expressed about how it seems to be only women

focusing on the victims of Epstein rather than on the politics of it all. One thing struck me from that interview though, which is when Vicky commented on the level of misogyny observed from men of this social standing. Sadly, it brought to my mind the case of the Warwick University WhatsApp group where, and I had forgotten this, Joe, so thank you for reminding me, where the members discussed raping women. And after the chat was leaked, the defence was that it was,

lads chat and therefore harmless banter. I was a student when this story broke and it really made me think twice about the so-called harmless men in my life and how they might be acting in men-only spaces. So obviously it's not all men, but sadly it's more men than it should be across the spectrum of society, e.g. far from being just the billionaire's boys' club. Joe, I'm afraid you are 100% right and hopefully you're about to hear an interview that will back up exactly what you've just said. Giselle Pellico had been married to her husband, Dominique, for nearly 50 years when she went with him to their local police station in the south of France in the November of 2020. A security guard at a supermarket had spotted Dominique using his phone to film up women's skirts.

Now, Giselle thought it was foolish, but was prepared to stick with him. In fact, it wasn't the first time he'd done it. He'd been fined 100 euros for the same offence a decade before, but he hadn't told his wife. The whole world now knows what the police had found on the devices they'd already seized from Pelico. Thousands of images and videos of Giselle being raped by her husband and more than 50 other men he'd recruited online.

Giselle had been drugged and was unconscious. Dominique Pelico's trial in Avignon in 2024 was held in public at the insistence of Giselle. She famously wanted shame to change sides. Why, she thought, should she be anonymised, and why should she be embarrassed? Her husband got the maximum 20-year prison sentence, the other rapists were all found guilty too,

though one appealed, and ended up with an additional year added to his nine-year sentence. Giselle's memoir, Him to Life, is out now. She is determined to move on with life, and has found happiness with a new supportive partner. Her lawyer, Stefan Babineau, took on her case at the end of 2022. I asked him to describe his first meeting with Giselle Pelico. Well, the first time we met Giselle with Antoine Camus, my colleague,

we were a bit, I would say, worried, because we didn't know what kind of person we would be meeting. We knew what happened to her because Antoine was told before the magnitude of what he had suffered. And we, of course, were worried not to say something which could be detrimental or something which could be harmful to her and at the same time being able to do our job as lawyers. But nothing of these fears, they vanished on the second we started speaking with her because she's someone who made us feel very comfortable, even if she was very, I would say, I mean, discreet.

But she was definitely someone easy to interact with. I think you had to be with her, you weren't physically with her when she watched the videos of her rapes for the very first time. Can you talk us through what that was like? We had prepared for that for quite a bit of time because watching the videos was the last step of her preparation for the trial. And at some point when Giselle decided that she wanted an open court trial and public trial, at that time she decided that if the public could see the videos of her rapes, then so should she be doing too?

I mean, she felt that she could not impose the videos to the broad public and refusing to watch them herself. And she took a few days to prepare. And then one day she asked me to set up for a call during which I would show her the videos. So you were, I think, in Paris, she was elsewhere at the time. And I think you were out of vision, though she knew that you were there.

Is that what happened? No, we were on a video call and sometime I shared my screen so that she could watch what I was starting on my computer. I mean, we, I seemed we were in a video call and I would just tell her that if she's ready, I will start a video and taking care every time to describe to her what would appear on the video. because there was, of course, no intent to surprise her in any way. She should not be, she would be shocked by what she would see. She didn't need to be surprised too. So I made sure that she was prepared for what she would be watching. Now, I know that you're a hugely experienced professional,

but you cannot ever have expected to work on a case like this. What has it been like? Yeah, I think no one can expect. for something like that to happen. Even as a seasoned criminal defense attorney, we are used to, I would say, well, extraordinary situations, but of this magnitude,

no one can expect to have to face that one day. But, well, we have a job to do. And more importantly, we had the trust of Giselle, and we needed to, well, to be, to be there for her and to make sure that she could, I would say, survive this judicial journey and not suffer more than she has already suffered. Well, certainly I've read her memoir and she has more than survived. She has triumphed and it's called him to life.

And in the book, you really do get a sense not just of her courage, but of her force of personality and her desire to, reclaim her life? Yes, but she said it's a very humble person and she really stick to the idea that anyone could have done the same.

This is what she believes that everyone has personal resources that they don't even suspect because when she discovered the extent of what was done to her, I mean, she

was extremely vulnerable and she would have never thought for a second that she would have to face such an ordeal. And it took time, it took a lot of time, but she found the strength to raise again and to face this extraordinary situation in which she found herself. And nowadays, as you saw in her book, her message is that anyone could have to do that. I mean, this is what she believes. I don't know if, well, I'm not sure I could have, but she personally is convinced. Well, I think I agree with you. I'm not sure that I would have had the courage. Can you tell me what you initially thought about her decision to make the trial public?

Well, it was her decision. So with Antoine Camus, we were very respectful of what she wanted. When she hired us at first, she made clear that she wanted. closed-door hearing because she was ashamed because she was she didn't feel that she could I would say face a public trial it was maybe two and a half years before the trial and we were fine with that I mean what mattered the most was what she wanted herself for her what she felt was the the right choice for her because for every victim what is important is what they need.

And so we prepared, we start preparing for a closed-door trial. And when she started having second thoughts about this decision, then we talked about it. Why would she consider having an open-door trial? Did she measure the, well, I would say the consequences of such decision? And she's only someone who's very thoughtful. So she's very intelligent. She never take a decision without carefully waiting the pros and the cons.

And when she had made a decision and she wanted an open-door trial, well, we said, okay, let's go back to work then to prepare for that. She said she wants shame to change sides. And part of that was making the trial public. Do you think it's worked? Has shame changed sides? Well, I wouldn't say that for the moment, but certainly we made progress with that. I think that shame has not completely changed sides. And I think that she helped many people to get rid of this feeling.

And she has received many letters in the past hours as it reminds us of what happened. during the trial of people who heard how she faced this ordeal and who found some strength to do the same. So this is why when she says that victims need to believe in themselves and to know that they're not alone, that's something that she keep repeating is that even if a victim is isolated, she will never be alone because there are millions who had faced the same thing. So if this feeling of solitude is really present and Giselle's nose of this feeling, she really wants everyone to hear that they're not alone. But I was struck in the book that Giselle talks about the people who even now don't entirely believe her. They don't buy her version of events.

What do we do about those people? I mean, Giselle understands why some people are still struggling to believe that something so horrendous can happen. And the truth is that when we heard of the story for first time, Antoine and I, we wanted to understand because it's not something, it's not a reality that it's easy to accept. But nowadays, refusing to believe that this happened becomes a choice. Because there has been a trial, there has. been a public trial, there has been debates, there has been 50 men accused, all of them convicted.

Out of 51 accused, only one appealed. The 50 others, they accepted the conviction, they accepted to be declared rapist. So the truth is out there now and refusing to believe that becomes a choice. But some of the rapists said in court that they believed that the only consent they required was from Giselle's husband. In the 21st century, that is so hard to understand. What do you say about that? Well, it's something that we really heard many, many times because there is this idea that a husband has a husband. rights over his wife's body. And as shocking as it may appear, it's something that is really common. And many men said that, well, they cannot, for example, some accused, they said in the trial, there cannot be a rape if the husband is in the room. They cannot be a rape because the husband

said, told me that it was okay for me to do that. And, well, I think that we need to think about what this means and what this says about the state of our society. Has France been forever changed by this trial, do you think? Or is there a danger that it could all be forgotten incredibly in five or ten years' time? Well, I think that the fight for equality is a fight that needs continue. progress because if there is, we cannot stop and remain at the same place where we are now. We need continuous progress because if we don't make a step forward, we immediately go backwards. That's something that we are all convinced here.

So I would say that it has triggered many debates in the French society as everywhere else, but the problem is far from being resolved. It's just a milestone. And that is how Giselle sees that. She said, well, now I have to pass the burden onto the next generation because, I mean, with every new generation, there is a lot to do if we don't want that to continue. Yeah, you obviously saw the rapists in court,

the 50 men who stood trial. Did they have anything in common with each other? Oh yeah, they were all men. And that's it. That's something they have in common. Yeah. Yeah, because, you know, we would like to find something that could, I would say, that could be something that they all have in common.

But the fact is that all of them had different lives, all of them. Not, for example, there is a common idea that when someone is abused sexually, when he's a kid, then this explains, this may explain why he would commit such abuse when he becomes an adult. But at the trial, there was a psychiatrist who said something that was quite true, is that little girls are much more exposed of being abused when they are infants. But it's not for that, that women are the most represented amongst sexual abusers. So, yes, they all have something in common. there were men. And it doesn't mean that all men have that in them. Of course not, but that they are

much more exposed to do these kind of things. And during the course of the trial, Giselle was put through some tough questioning, including, we should say from female defence lawyers. That has to be acknowledged. But I guess you would say they were doing their job. But she was accused of, quotes, I don't know, moving her hip to indicate that she might possibly be participating. I mean, how on earth does anybody get through that? Well, because Giselle knew what she would be facing. Giselle knew what she would be facing when she decided to have an open-door trial. And this is what she wanted to show.

She wanted to expose the way victims are treated in court. She wanted to show to the victims that they may survive that and they may even triumph over this. Because, yes, she was definitely not spared in the, I would say, in the aggressivity of the questions. But eventually they all got convicted. And that's all that matters. Yes, well, absolutely. But of course, not everybody was caught. There are still other rapists out there, aren't there?

Yes, it's really likely. Unfortunately, at some point, the investigators had to decide where to stop because they have been investigating for more than three years. And at some point, there was a risk that if the case didn't proceed, there could be other releases of abusers that were in court detained. they were in temporary detention and they could not be kept much longer. So it was necessary for the trial to start. And it was what we wanted to.

I mean, Giselle wanted to be able to put this part of her life behind her. So, yeah. And obviously in the United Kingdom and indeed across the world, there is so much conversation at the moment about Epstein. And I wonder what your thoughts are on all that. particularly around the idea of shame changing sides. There's only one person in prison, that's at the Gillesne Maxwell. What would you say about all that?

Well, what strikes me with this case is how, I would say, the extent the deepness of the roots that Geoffrey Epstein had built the extent of his relationships and the fact that we can now say that many people knew they preferred to ignore what was a very disturbing reality. What Giselle said, what she cannot forgive to the men who came is that none of them reported, none of them even made a phone call to say, well, there is a woman in danger.

And I would say that with Epstein, if someone, had spoken before, maybe it could have saved many of his victims. So it brings us back to the question of silence and the necessity to be public, the necessity to if the victims can survive public trials, then to have public trials. But if they cannot, then close-door hearings are fine. What's important is for abuser to be prosecuted and convicted. The triumph is that Giselle has moved on with her life. She's written this incredibly powerful book.

She has a new partner. She's fallen in love with a man who sounds absolutely lovely. Do you see her, talk to her often? What is the sort of state of your friendship? Because you must be in some ways very close to her. Well, we have been through something which was unexpected. That's for sure. But for us, it's important for Giselle to move on with her life.

life. And well, of course, we will always be linked and we will remain in contact. But, well, she has a life to live and we hope for her that she has a very long and happy life because she deserves it. And she wanted to show also because she's someone who's very private. And when she shared this very personal information, what she wanted, was to really send a message of hope. There is a life that exists out there even for victims, even for victims or horrendous facts. And they may survive that,

and they may even have a happy life after that. That is the French lawyer, Stefan Babineau, who represented Giselle Pelico. Her memoir, Hymn to Life, is a tough read, but I think Fee had a good point when she suggested a week or so ago that people buy it, if you think you're going to find it too tough, you don't need to read it,

but if you could get to the top of the bestsellers, that would be a statement, wouldn't it? And it would be quite good to play a part in it. Actually, my view is that it is a good, good book and needs to be read. I mean, hard to stomach, but does need to be read. But I totally appreciate that I've not had, I wasn't triggered by the content

because I've never been through an experience, of that nature or anything approaching it. That's just worth saying. So it isn't a book that everyone could read. I totally get that. Tomorrow's guest is a fantastic, just a great woman, Maggie Adairn, who's going to talk astrophysics, space, space travel, and the racism she's encountered in her life and career.

She's always worth hearing from. She's on the pod tomorrow. Congratulations. You've staggered somehow to the end of another. Offair with Jane and Fee. Thank you. If you'd like to hear us do this live, and we do do it live, every day, Monday to Thursday, 2 till 4 on Times Radio. The Jeopardy is off the scale. And if you listen to this, you'll understand exactly why that's the case.

So you can get the radio online, on DAB, or on the free Times Radio app. Offair is produced by Eve Salisbury, and the executive producer is Rosie Cutler.