Suspected of being one of the logisticians of the attacks, the accused, who had expressed a lot during the examination of his personality, claimed his right to silence on the first day of his interrogation on the merits .
by
A word, first, of the atmosphere. A trial is a record, but it is also a rhythm, a mateuit, a kind of closed circuit with renewable energy. Each audience day draws from that of the day before, feeds, enriches it, and already prepares that of the next day. Thus is not constructed by step the story of a judicial truth.
The exceptional duration of the trial of the attacks of 13-November, opened in September 2021 and whose outcome is scheduled for June, the complexity of a file that had to be cut into slices, constitute a first obstacle to this alchemy of the hearing. The health hazards have added another, by imposing twice a week of suspension since the beginning of January, which led to a climbing interrogation and to modify the order. These jersey begin to weigh on the actors of the trial, accused, magistrates and lawyers. And it felt particularly, Wednesday, January 26th.
Everything was ready for the examination of Mohamed Bakkali, 34, to whom he is criticized for conveying members of the commando and rented plans for them in Belgium. The moment was expected, both the accused had distinguished himself from his booking neighbors during his rapid personality exam in November 2021. The ease of his expression, the desire he manifested to explain himself on his career, The care and reflection that he brought to his answers, his success of a degree of sociology in detention acaw interest.
Mohamed Bakkali also presents another singularity: it is both one of the rare accused whose criminal record is virgin and the one on which a sentence of 25 years of criminal imprisonment weighs, pronounced in December 2020. Trial trial, that of the thalys attack, which he appealed, vigorously contesting his involvement.
Mohamed Bakkali, therefore, gets up and approaches the microphone. President Jean-Louis Perès has opened a cardboard shirt and is about to ask him questions about this first phase of consideration at the bottom, relating to his conception of religion.
“I have not the more the strength to fight and explain to me “
“I wanted to tell you something before. I had another trial. I explained at length. I had a conviction to which I did not expect. Whatever I say, whatever I do My word has no value. I had nice play the game, it did not change anything. There was [at the beginning of the trial] the five weeks of civil parties. It concluded me. I Do not have the strength to fight and explain to me. The reality is that I do not know what person I was at the time. I will assert my right to silence …
You have 56.8% of this article to be read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.