Falzone Trial Paused for Erotic Salon as Petition Reaches 5,000 Signatures

The high-profile trial of Paolo Falzone, accused of driving into a carnival procession in Strépy-Bracquegnies in March 2022 — killing seven people and injuring 38 — is set to be interrupted from 4 to 8 June 2026 to accommodate the pre-scheduled “Erotix” erotic salon at the Lotto Mons Expo venue. The unusual scheduling conflict has sparked public outcry, with a petition denouncing the interruption as a “lack of respect” toward victims gathering over 5,000 signatures in just three days.

Background of the Tragedy

On 20 March 2022, in the early morning, Paolo Falzone was driving a BMW 5 Series at 174 km/h in a 50 km/h zone when he plowed into a group of Gilles — traditional carnival participants being picked up for the Strépy-Bracquegnies carnival — on Rue des Canadiens. The driver was filming himself on his phone moments before impact, according to Wikipedia.

Falzone, now 36, faces charges of seven counts of murder and 81 counts of attempted murder. His passenger, Antonino Falzone (no relation), is charged with failure to render aid. Both men had blood alcohol levels above the legal limit.

The Trial and the Unusual Interruption

The trial began on 4 May 2026 at Lotto Mons Expo, a convention center chosen because it was the only venue capable of accommodating the exceptionally large assize court, with nearly 270 witnesses expected to testify. The court occupies only part of the venue, and the infrastructure will not be dismantled during the pause — only suspended with appropriate security measures.

According to RTBF, the interruption was organized with the agreement of all parties concerned. Hugo Schryers, manager of Mons Expo, reminded that he is bound by contract with the Erotix organizers, who reserved the venue nearly two years ago. The pause was a “sine qua non” condition for allowing the judicial authorities to rent Mons Expo — without it, the trial would have been delayed by several months.

Public Outcry and Petition

Marc Willocq, a resident of Dour not directly involved in the case, launched a petition denouncing the interruption. “Survivors and loved ones come here to share their tears, their broken bodies, and their shattered lives,” he wrote. “The judicial organization and the manager of Lotto Mons Expo have chosen to pack up to make way for stalls of leather and accessories. An insult to the memory and dignity of the victims.”

The petition reached 5,676 signatures by the time of the RTBF report on 22 May.

Official Response

The Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Court of Appeal of Mons issued a statement on the evening of 22 May, disassociating themselves from the petition. They confirmed that the interruption was organized with the agreement of all parties and emphasized that Lotto Mons Expo was the only venue capable of accommodating the trial. The authorities highlighted “the exemplary behavior of all parties, which allows this exceptional trial to proceed serenely in a dignified and respectful atmosphere,” as RTBF reported.

Victims’ Perspective

Notably, some victims have expressed understanding of the situation. Florian, a survivor of the tragedy who testified during the trial, stated: “Unfortunately, we knew it from the beginning. We also knew which days we would be able to disconnect and not think about it anymore. We know very well that during the interruption, we’ll be at home, in peace, to catch our breath and be ready for the end of the trial.”

What’s Next

The trial is expected to resume after the five-day pause and conclude by mid-June. Paolo Falzone faces up to 30 years in prison if convicted. The unusual scheduling conflict has raised broader questions about venue selection for major trials in Belgium and whether dedicated court infrastructure should be prioritized over commercial venues. As La Libre noted at the trial’s opening, the transformation of Lotto Mons Expo into a giant assize court was itself unprecedented — a measure of the extraordinary scale of these proceedings.

The petition continues to gather signatures, though judicial authorities have made clear they stand by the scheduling arrangement as a practical necessity.