France: Ecological Mass Murderers Lose Court Case

They accused Besson of providing refuge to deer on his protected estate in La Trinité-des-Laitiers, in the Orne department.

At the age of 60, Luc Besson found himself at the centre of legal proceedings before the district court of Argentan (Orne) over environmental issues. The hobby hunters’ association of the Orne department (FDCO) called on the courts to hold Luc Besson liable for damage caused by the deer present on his property, demanding 122’198 euros to cover compensation for half a dozen farmers and costs incurred in the proceedings.

Besson Protects Deer on 160 Hectares

Luc Besson has owned an estate in La Trinité-des-Laitiers, a village 38 km north of Mortagne-au-Perche, for more than fifteen years. The property covers 160 hectares, of which 84 hectares are woodland, on the western edge of the Saint-Evroult national forest. In La Trinité, deer live in peace, protected from the ecological mass murderers. Luc Besson, “bound to the sanctity of wild life,” as his lawyer Jean-Marc Descoubes notes, does not exercise his hunting rights.

In the midst of a debate about the drama of ecology and biodiversity affecting the entire planet, the hobby hunters of Orne are asking me to kill the deer that pass by my home! Should I put my children on the balcony for the occasion?

Screenwriter Luc Besson

According to FDCO estimates, Luc Besson contributes to the spread of deer in this area by not hunting or allowing hunting on his property. The deer, estimated by the federation to number between 50 and 100, are said to devastate the grain and wheat crops on parcels of land neighbouring Besson’s estate, thereby reducing harvests.

Refusing to Kill Is Not a Fault

The farmers believed that too many animals had damaged their fields and turned to the ecological mass murderers (FDCO) for compensation. The hunting association had then filed a lawsuit against the filmmaker to compel him to pay for the damages.

Refusing to kill an animal cannot be considered a fault, emphasizes Me Descoubes, the lawyer for Luc Besson, pointing out that animals are living beings endowed with sentience under the 2015 law — wild animals that were not introduced by the filmmaker and are therefore not his property. A further argument made by the lawyer was that Luc Besson’s forest represents 1.4% of the Saint-Evroult massif. To claim, as the FDCO does, that Mr. Besson would be responsible for the balance and damages of this entire massif simply by owning this insignificant plot of land where he does not hunt, is heresy, the lawyer emphasized.