François Hollande had just finished giving a four-hour witness a terrorist offense of the 20 men accused of the November 13 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris while one of them stood as if speaking in a packed courtroom.
It was Salah Abdeslam, the only survivor of an Isis-backed terrorist attack on the French capital, killing 130 people. between the former president and the defendant, who earlier in the case justified the attack as a strong response to French airlines in Syria and blamed Hollande directly for them.
“No, Mr. Abdeslam, if you have any questions you can go to your lawyers!” Jean-Louis Périès, presiding judge, intervened to reduce the issue and end the running trial.
Hollande’s presence and disapproval are one of the main sources of information case, now in its third month, has been working as a tough time in France. Not only does the country test the defendants at the Bataclan theater, the restaurant and the Stade de France, it also counts the people for the incidents, and the damage they brought to France.
The deliberately constituted court in the highly protected Palais de Justice in Paris has become the stage for defendants, investigators, survivors and politicians who had the power at the time to testify, as well as psychologists and sociologists to explain what is happening.
The attacks were part of a a dangerous time for France as Isis troops retreated from Syria and Iraq and the French people who followed in their footsteps releasing a number of deadly substances. He also linked the killing of journalists to Charlie Hebdo magazine in January 2015 and a car bombing in Nice in July 2016.
Hollande Wednesday appeared as a witness summoned by a group of victims as allowed in France, not by the defendants or security forces, and neither he nor the government is prosecuted. He wanted to remember what he had experienced that night when he was in the Stade de France for a football game, his decision to order the demolition to end Bataclan’s siege and what the government was doing before and after.
Sharon Weill, a law professor working on terrorism at the American University of Paris, said the appearance of the former president was a “fun act” that showed how serious the case was than judging the accused.
“Not only is it a case of crime, but it is also a matter of finding out where the victims can speak, and now the political issues that have taken place are being investigated,” he said. “Of course, the government is not being prosecuted here but the President had to answer questions. The court has become like a democratic court.”
French journalists often cover the case wonderful, meaning strange or strange. The statement indicates the magnitude of the trial that is expected to take place until next May. France wants to make sure its judiciary has a problem testing men accused of committing the most serious crimes in the world during peacetime.
Most of the attackers on November 13 died the same night or shortly after police, except for one Abdeslam, who is said to have had an explosive jacket that night that did not explode. Some critics are accused of helping him flee to Brussels, providing aid such as fake papers, or being part of Isis cells plotting a coup in Europe.
The first month of evidence came from forensic investigators and the follow-up investigation; then came five weeks of emotional stories from survivors and their families.
Last week, the defendants testified in what they said was a characteristic of their upbringing and culture. Contrary to his earlier rhetoric, Abdeslam was a mediator when he spoke of his peaceful childhood. City of Brussels’ Molenbeek and admitted that he loved to gamble with nightclubs. His mother and sister are also expected to testify. Evidence of the defendants’ religious views and emotional reactions will be heard later.
It was Mohamed Abrini, a childhood friend and opponent of Abdeslam, who gave a memorable lineup when he said: “We did not come out of our mother’s womb holding Kalashnikovs.”
There was such a decline on Wednesday when some defense attorneys sought to block the image of Hollande and the extremists of Islamist activists, arguing that they were useless as evidence. “Do not allow this case to be politically motivated,” pleaded one. The judges vanquished them.
Lawyers for the victims questioned Hollande several times if all efforts were made to stem the tide of violence. Some argued that law enforcement agencies did not follow warnings in the summer of 2015 that the threats were being organized against unidentified protest halls.
“We did not know if they would hit me, when or how,” Hollande said, although he admitted he knew Isis wanted to commit atrocities in Europe.
Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online.
“I see that defense lawyers are in international politics and not in crime,” Hollande said in a statement.
Xavier Nogueras, a former defense attorney for terrorism, asked the last question of the day: “If everything was possible, what was wrong with your mind? Is terrorism inevitable? ”
Hollande responded: “There will be more terrorists, and democratic governments must find answers to this, in law.”