Louis Mussington and his four vice presidents, who were absent from the hearing, were granted a postponement until January 13

A hearing in which the defendant was not present in the dock began on Wednesday, October 7. Following an initial trial earlier this week, Louis Mussington appeared once again before the Saint-Martin Criminal Court, this time alongside his four vice presidents: Michel Petit, Bernadette Davis, Dominique Democrite Louisy, and Alain Richardson.
The elected officials face three charges. They are accused of having, between 2022 and 2026, circumvented public procurement rules in order to favor a car rental company by allowing it to continue providing services after the initial contract expired.
They are also suspected of having directly selected several car rental companies without going through the competitive bidding procedures required by law, thereby granting them an undue advantage. Finally, they are accused of using official vehicles—whose rental costs were covered by the local government—for personal purposes, at an estimated cost ranging from 32,082.33 to 99,858.50 euros.

Arguments that remain the same

At the opening of the hearing, Dominique Nicolas, Louis Mussington’s attorney, along with his partner—who is representing the other elected officials—requested that the case be adjourned. As he had done two days earlier, the attorney emphasized the need for more time to prepare the defense for the president of the Collectivité. According to him, he was not able to obtain a copy of the case file until September 9, despite having previously submitted two requests to the court.
Louis Mussington’s health was also raised. Unlike at the first hearing, his attorney this time presented a medical certificate, dated October 2, justifying the president’s absence for ten days.
“Regarding the motion to adjourn, I maintain the same position as on Monday and ask that you deny it,” the prosecutor stated, arguing that the copy of the case file was provided sufficiently in advance. However, with the presentation of the medical certificate, she withdrew her request for a warrant to bring the president before the court.

As for the co-defendants, “the least they could have done would have been to deign to appear in court,” she said, noting that a postponement is by no means a legal right. While she is not requesting an arrest warrant for them, she emphasized that their absence will be taken into account at the next hearing. These remarks did not sit well with Attorney Dominique Nicolas, who said he was “concerned about the aggressiveness of the prosecution.”
After deliberating, the court ultimately decided to grant a postponement of the case for all the defendants. The case will be heard on January 13, 2027, at 8:30 a.m.