Credits: Durdux / Wikimedia Commons — CC BY 3.0.
Gala smiles, flawless facades. That sheen can hide wounds. Prestige does not immunize against coercive control. Love, fame, beauty, and fear.
Starting from Alexandra Rosenfeld’s statement, the former Miss France who described on September 3, 2025 on Quotidien a relationship marked by violence and coercive control attributed to chef Jean Imbert, this article sheds light on what women mostly experience in relationships. It puts the accounts of other ex-partners into perspective and spells out the mechanisms. It also lays out support resources. Then it addresses procedural safeguards at the end of the text.
“What You Can’t See”: What Alexandra Rosenfeld Says
On the Quotidien set, Alexandra Rosenfeld described a relationship in the early 2010s where, she says, repeated humiliation gradually shaped everyday life: disparaging remarks about her social background, criticism of her loved ones, comments about her appearance or activities. She places the heart of the violence in psychological harm: less about blows, more about constant put-downs that erode self-esteem.
The former Miss France also describes intrusion into her private life. She also recounts the persistent presence outside her home. In addition, this took place in the building’s common areas and near her daughter’s school. Finally, there were calls to her mother. She also says she suffered a punch to the face, resulting in a broken nose, an episode the person involved disputes. Beyond the alleged incident, what she emphasizes is the difficulty of leaving: “you leave and you come back,” she explains in substance, with coercive control making separation precarious and always at risk of being reversed.
This testimony from a survivor of domestic violence, rare from a public figure, matters less for its shock value than for the light it sheds on a still poorly understood phenomenon: how violence can take hold quietly, then trap a person.
Domestic Violence Testimonies: Similar Patterns Described by Ex-Partners
Alexandra Rosenfeld’s account is part of a chorus of testimonies. Lila Salet, an ex-partner, filed a complaint for domestic violence and unlawful confinement for events she places in 2012–2013. In the media, she spoke of insidious remarks, intense jealousy, and a hardening of behavior. Other women also mention psychological violence and, for some, physical harm. The person involved denies these accounts and announced he would step back from his activities during the investigation.
Beyond their nuances, these testimonies point to the same mechanism: setting up devaluation (criticism, sarcasm), tightening the vise (monitoring, intrusions, isolation), alternating acts of affection and latent threats. This alternation produces the stunning effect and uncertainty that make leaving difficult.
Understanding Coercive Control: From Coercive Control to Isolation
In the definition of domestic violence, coercive control refers to coercive control: more than an episode, a system. It is expressed through repeated behaviors: criticism, humiliation, control of movement, restricted access to resources, physical or digital intrusions, emotional blackmail. The goal is to secure compliance by weakening the person’s autonomy.
This framework explains several apparent paradoxes:
- “Why doesn’t she leave?” The tension – explosion – justification – honeymoon cycle sustains hope and fear. Sometimes, reactions under coercive control, known as “reactive abuse,” occur. So leaving often exposes a person to escalation.
- “Why aren’t there any visible signs?” Psychological violence leaves few material traces but causes lasting harm to mental health (anxiety, insomnia, post-traumatic stress disorder).
- “Why speak up years later?” Shock and shame delay speaking out. In addition, some cases become time-barred over time. Moreover, the voice of a well-known person can unleash other stories.
A Massive, Gendered Phenomenon
In France, law enforcement recorded about 271,000 victims in 2023 for intrafamily violence. In addition, these violences also include those within couples, about 85% of which involve women. That same year, 119 people died at the hands of a partner. Of them, 96 women lost their lives. Thus, that amounts to one death every three days. Advocacy groups stress that only a fraction of victims report the facts: the dark figure remains high.
These violences take several forms: physical, sexual, verbal/psychological, economic (control of money, forced debt), and administrative (withholding documents, obstruction). They affect children, even without direct blows, through exposure to scenes of aggression, with documented psychological consequences.
Protect, Document, Act: What To Do and Who To Contact
- In immediate danger? Call 17 (police/gendarmerie) or 112.
- Listening, advice, referral: 3919 (free, anonymous, 24/7), staffed by trained professionals.
- Comprehensive support: 116 006 (France Victimes) for psychological and legal help.
- Protective measures: The family court judge can issue a protection order. It includes no-contact orders, allocation of the home, and measures for children. In dangerous situations, an anti-approach bracelet can be used. Depending on the department, a dangerous-person emergency phone is also available.
- Build a file: have it medically documented (doctor, ideally an UMJ), save messages and screenshots, photos of injuries, certificates, statements from loved ones, dates and places.
- Local support: CIDFF, municipal social action centers, access to justice centers, specialized associations.
The goal is not only criminal: it is also to make the present safe (housing, distance, children) and to prepare the future (care, work, financial independence).
The Reach of a Public Voice
When a well-known person speaks out, the media echo can be mixed: it frees other voices and puts pressure on institutions, but it can also overheat public debate, with smear campaigns, doxxing, or social-media trials. Hence the importance of a measured approach: repeat what is established, what is alleged, what is under investigation.
In this case, the main value of Alexandra Rosenfeld’s testimony lies in the education of reality: naming the small harms, the back-and-forth of threats and apologies, the fear during separation, the mental and administrative burden of protecting oneself. These elements, confirmed by other accounts, reveal a continuum of violence. Too often, it is taken seriously only when tragedy strikes.
Legal Framework: What The Law Says About Psychological Violence
The Penal Code punishes violence within a couple “whatever its nature,” including psychological violence. Marital coercive control is a specific offense. In fact, it involves repeated acts aimed at deteriorating living conditions. In addition, it harms physical or mental health. The penalties are enhanced when a minor is involved or in cases of incapacity. There are also offenses of threats, harassment, and malicious calls. In addition, there is intrusion into the home or attacks on information systems. This includes digital spying and geolocation.
On the civil side, the protection order allows rapid measures. Thus, it helps prevent repeat offenses and stabilize the situation of victims and children. In practice, access to rights is often the key issue: hence the need for specialized support from the first warning signs.
And What About Justice? Safeguards and Accountability (Read Last)
Because a rule-of-law state does not stop at outrage, it is necessary to recall the procedural safeguards. At the end of the process, this is essential. In the case involving Jean Imbert, the reported facts remain alleged, complaints have been filed, an investigation is open, and the person involved denies them. The presumption of innocence fully applies until any court decision. It does not diminish the seriousness of the accounts, but it protects due process. In addition, it ensures the search for evidence and the proportionality of public reactions.
The responsibility of the media and readers is to inform and stay informed without creating a parallel court. Likewise, the responsibility of public authorities is to offer clear and effective protection pathways. Finally, the collective responsibility is to listen without minimizing, to name without excess, and to support those who, like Alexandra Rosenfeld and other ex-partners, take the risk of speaking out.
Useful resources: 3919 (24/7), 116 006 (France Victimes), justice.fr (Protection Order), CIDFF, UMJ.