Psychiatrists and psychologists showed from Wednesday to Friday in front of the Paris Special Assize Court. If some explanations have been bright, others question the exercise itself.
by
A lot of psychiatrists and psychologists are expected to appear at the bar of a sitting trial. It should not be. “A psychiatric or psychological exam can only be disappointing”: Daniel Zagury, thirty-five years of psychiatric expertise in court, has admitted the limit of the year, Thursday, April 21, in preamble to the presentation. He was going to make his report on Salah Abdeslam. Presentation which, for the shot, was not disappointing at all.
Impairable in the judicial procedure, these examinations aim to detect psychic disorders in an accused, and must determine whether they have resulted in an abolition or alteration of his discernment at the time of the fact – in this case; Is not the case for any of the fourteen accused at the trial of 13-November, all have been criminal responsible.
But we often expect more from these expertise: it is hoped for keys to understanding the psychism of the accused that the hearing would not have provided. It must be recognized that it is often perplexed or disappointed. For three days, from Wednesday 20 to Friday, April 22, nine psychiatrist experts and psychologists showed before the Assize Court specially composed of Paris. It was sometimes bright, it was sometimes appalling too.
The bright, so it was the subtle presentation of the psychiatric expertise of Salah Abdeslam, a memorable moment of hearing, two hours to navigate with Dr. Daniel Zagury and Bernard Ballivet in the toumented brain’s meanders of the accused number one, two hours to define his “oscillation” between the fighter posture of the ‘Islamic State Organization and that of the little guy of Molenbeek (Belgium) caught up with his emotions. Two hours of presentation and stimulating questions and responses that have come out with the impression of being illuminated, and to better understand who is Salah Abdeslam.
Final conclusions
The presentations concerning the other accused were, alas, of a more random quality, and did not allow, if not very punishment, to learn more than what seven months of hearing had given us to see. But how could they have been otherwise? For this trial, the expertise consisted of an interview with the misrepresentation of one hour or two, in detention, four, five, six years before the trial, with the exception of that of Salah Abdeslam, who has took place in November 2021. Perhaps conditions that perhaps determine the existence or not of a mental pathology, but not to go further.
You have 62.79% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.