Soissons, France – A French man standing trial for the involuntary manslaughter of his pregnant girlfriend has made a startling plea: if his dog is found responsible for her death, he asked the court to euthanize the animal. Christophe Ellul, 52, appeared in court in Soissons on Tuesday, March 3, 2026, facing accusations related to the death of Elisa Pilarski, 29, who was found brutally attacked in the Retz Forest in November 2019.
The case, which has gripped France for seven years, centers around the circumstances surrounding Pilarski’s death. She was discovered with horrific injuries – multiple bite marks covering her body – alongside Ellul’s dog, Curtis. Even as Ellul maintains his innocence and questions whether Curtis acted alone, investigators have focused on the dog’s potential involvement. Pilarski was six months pregnant with a son, Enzo, at the time of her death, adding another layer of tragedy to the case. The prosecution alleges Ellul was negligent in controlling his dog, leading to the fatal attack. Ellul faces a potential ten-year prison sentence if convicted of the charge of aggravated involuntary manslaughter.
A Case Marked by Tragedy and Uncertainty
“I want the truth. If Curtis is guilty, put him down. But show me the evidence,” Ellul reportedly stated at the opening of the trial, according to reports from Le Monde. This dramatic plea underscores the complex emotional landscape of the case, where Ellul is simultaneously a bereaved partner and a suspect in his girlfriend’s death. The court in Soissons is tasked with unraveling a series of events that occurred on November 16, 2019, in the Retz Forest, near Villers-Cotterêts.
The circumstances surrounding Pilarski’s death are particularly gruesome. Investigators found her body partially dismembered, with approximately ten bite marks on her neck, nine on her left arm, and nineteen on her right. Her scalp and right thigh were missing. The horrific nature of the injuries immediately focused attention on the possibility of an animal attack. However, the presence of a nearby hunting party on the same day has as well raised questions about other potential factors contributing to Pilarski’s death.
The Hunting Party and a Contested Timeline
Adding another layer of complexity to the case is the fact that a hunting party, comprised of twenty-one dogs, was active in the Retz Forest on the same day Pilarski was attacked. According to reports, the hunting party included a high-ranking police official. While the hunting dogs were initially considered potential suspects, they were later cleared of direct involvement in the attack. However, the presence of the hunt has fueled speculation and raised concerns about whether the dogs may have played a role in disturbing the area or influencing the events that led to Pilarski’s death. The hunting party’s presence has also led to accusations that their activities may have interfered with the initial investigation.
The defense, led by Alexandre Novion, has challenged the narrative that Curtis was solely responsible for Pilarski’s death. Novion has questioned the thoroughness of the investigation and suggested that other factors, such as the hunting party, may have contributed to the tragedy. He has also raised concerns about the evidence linking Curtis directly to the attack. The defense argues that Ellul had no knowledge of any dangerous tendencies in his dog and that We see unfair to hold him responsible for an unforeseen event.
Legal Challenges and Procedural Disputes
The opening day of the trial was not without its procedural challenges. Novion reportedly questioned the standing of a hunting association that had joined the proceedings as a civil party, arguing that the association lacked a direct connection to the alleged crime. This challenge highlights the broader debate surrounding the role of hunting in rural France and the potential for conflicts between hunters and other forest users. The association claims its reputation has been damaged by the incident, but Novion dismissed the claim as unwarranted, characterizing the proceedings as not a “barnum” where anyone could participate.
The case is being heard before the correctional court of Soissons, and the prosecution is seeking a ten-year prison sentence for Ellul on charges of aggravated involuntary manslaughter. The severity of the potential sentence reflects the gravity of the alleged offense and the tragic circumstances surrounding Pilarski’s death. The court will need to carefully weigh the evidence presented by both sides and determine whether Ellul was negligent in controlling his dog and whether that negligence directly contributed to Pilarski’s death.
The Question of Curtis’s Role
The central question of the trial revolves around the role of Curtis, the dog, in Pilarski’s death. Investigators have examined the dog’s behavior and history, but the evidence remains inconclusive. The prosecution will likely present evidence of the bite marks on Pilarski’s body and argue that Curtis was the only animal capable of inflicting such injuries. The defense, will likely argue that the bite marks could have been caused by other animals, including those from the hunting party. The outcome of the trial may hinge on the court’s assessment of the forensic evidence and its credibility.
The case has sparked a national debate in France about dog ownership, responsible pet care, and the potential dangers of allowing dogs to roam freely in public spaces. Animal welfare organizations have called for stricter regulations on dog ownership and increased penalties for owners whose dogs cause harm to others. The tragedy has also raised questions about the safety of hunting activities and the potential for conflicts between hunters and other forest users. The debate is likely to continue long after the trial concludes.
The trial is expected to last several days, with testimony from witnesses, forensic experts, and both the prosecution and defense. The court will also consider evidence related to the hunting party and its activities on the day of Pilarski’s death. The outcome of the trial will have significant implications for Ellul, Curtis, and the broader community. The case serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers of animal attacks and the importance of responsible pet ownership.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for March 7, 2026, where further witness testimony is expected. Updates on the trial will be available through French news outlets, including Le Monde and Le Figaro. The court is expected to deliver its verdict in late March.
What are your thoughts on this tragic case? Share your comments below and let us recognize what you think. Don’t forget to share this article with your network to keep the conversation going.