Mohammed Amri, judged to have helped Salah Abdeslam to flee after the attacks, was questioned Friday. Two questions, which base his charge, crossed the debates: is it radicalized? And did he know that Salah Abdeslam was?
by
In the evening of November 13, 2015, while the Killing of Bataclan was underway, Salah Abdeslam had asked two neighborhood friends, originating as him from the Brussels municipality of Molenbeek, to pick it up in Paris on the ground. He would have fallen out of the car. Mohammed Amri had waited for the end of his work at the Social Samu of Brussels, at 2 o’clock in the morning, to embark his friend Hamza Attou and roll at tombs open to Paris at the rescue of his friend. On the way back, Salah Abdeslam had entrusted her role in the attacks, before disappearing in the streets of Brussels.
An intrigue image since the beginning of the trial of the 17-November attacks: of the two accused who helped Salah Abdeslam from the Cavale, one appears free and the other detainee. Mohammed Amri, who was questioned, Friday, January 28, on his relationship to religion, attended his trial locked in a glazed box before regaining every night his cell. His companion, sitting on a bench in front of him, drop to the joys of public transport after each day of hearing.
The difference between the spells of the two accomplices holds three letters: AMT, for “Association of terrorist criminal”. Both are returned for “terrorist conceal”, a seniors punishable by six years in prison, but Mohammed Amri is also judged for AMT, an offense as subtle as plastic for which he incurs twenty years of imprisonment. There are two ways to be caught by the net of an AMT in a terrorist folder: either because we are radicalized, either because we have helped a third becoming aware that it was.
“People abused his kindness”
Is Mohammed Amri radicalized? On the screen of the Paris Special Assisi Court appears a young woman with Venetian blond hair. Kim T., a Belgian converted 31 years old, is puériculture. She is mostly the wife of Mohammed Amri, “his whole, his little gem”, she says. Long live and spontaneous, this fan of “Secret Story” is his main discharge witness. A detail that is not one: it is not veiled.
The young wife draws the portrait of a husband “introverted”, a little soft and “fat consumer” of cannabis. “The narcotics were a problem in the couple, ever religion. I’ve never had any doubt, it was not radicalized. He was not even regular in his practice … it was not a leader, rather A follower, even at home, she adds, stifling a softening laugh. He is extremely kind, too good. He likes to help. He felt useful to the social Samu, he brought human warmth to people at the Street. People abused his naivety.
You have 55.19% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.