After nine months of an extraordinary trial, the three representatives of the public prosecutor began their indictment on Wednesday, which will be concluded on Friday with the required sentences.
by
With extraordinary trial, unprecedented indictment. Nine months after the opening of the trial of the attacks of November 13, the public prosecutor began, Wednesday, June 8, a three-voice river indictment that will spread over three days. From magistrate memory, exercise is a first. The three representatives of the National Anti -terrorist Prosecutor’s Office (PNAT) – Camille Hennetier, Nicolas Braconnay and Nicolas Le Bris – planned to take turns for almost fifteen hours for this accusation marathon before claiming, on Friday, sentences for the twenty accused .
But before “rebuilding the puzzle” of this titanic file and approaching the role of each in this “infernal mechanics”, the public prosecutor took height by opening his requisitions with a long introduction with two voices. Camille Hennetier is the first to approach the microphone. Many, at this hearing, discover her face. For this solemn moment, the magistrate chose to remove her mask. In a soft, almost reassuring voice, it begins by drawing up for the approximately 2,500 civil parties a sensitive and human assessment of this trial as historic as it is flawless:
“What will we remember from this audience? What images, what words will remain? Your verdict of course, the names of the disappeared, the accounts of the victims finally, undoubtedly. They were the realization of the sum of all these misfortunes, of these scars … These stories also set us an inverted mirror. That of open and tolerant people in the face of obscurantism. That of the strength of survivors in the face of the cowardice of those who murdered. That of the beauty of words Faced with the simplistic rhetoric of a speech atnon ad nauseam … “
” This trial made it possible to think “
Conscious of the immense hopes placed in this trial, the magistrate embraces by her words the disappointed expectations, the limits of justice in the face of the abyss of pain and the questions that have remained unanswered. “Many of those who came to testify told us about their absolute misunderstanding in the face of these acts. They told us that they had that this trial helps them to understand. However is it possible? At the end of These nine months of audience, will these victims have understood why young Europeans murdered people on the terraces, the Stade de France and at the Bataclan? “
This trial had the immense task of answering political, sociological, human “questions” which have sometimes exceeded his judicial framework “, he” was responsible for symbols and hopes perhaps sometimes too great for him “, She suits: “From the trial does not always spring the truth, but a judicial truth. The latter is probably not enough, it does not allow to understand evil, barbarism, terror …”
You have 63.89% of this article to read. The continuation is reserved for subscribers.