The Paris Court of Appeal informed, Tuesday, February 14, the dismissal enjoyed by a policewoman accused of having wrapped by an LBD shot a “yellow vest”, during a violent demonstration in March 2019 in Paris.
The investigation chamber “returned the file to the investigating judge”. Police Marine V., accused of having wrapped by a shot of defensive ball launcher (LBD) David Breidenstein, a “yellow vest”, during a violent demonstration in March 2019 in Paris, had previously benefited from A dismissal in this case. On Tuesday, February 14, the Paris Court of Appeal invaded the latter, according to a judicial source, which specifies that justice considers the police as the author of the shooting, which it disputes. During a hearing at the Court of Appeal on January 16, 2023, in the presence of Mr. Breidenstein and a rally of mutilated “yellow vests”, the general prosecutor’s office of the Paris Court of Appeal had required the confirmation of the confirmation dismissal.
On March 16, 2019, during a demonstration on the Champs-Elysées, this police officer of the anti-crime brigade (BAC) of Paris had shot 15 times with his LBD, in particular at the place and at the time when Mr. Breidenstein was injured. During the investigation, Marine V. said it was “sure” for not having touched Mr. Breidenstein “since I did not shoot in the upper part of the body and he was not throwing a Projectile “. The videos of March 16, filmed by the camera of his LBD, were deleted.
The question of the legality of the shot
For the judge signatory of the dismissal in July 2022, the investigation established that “Marine V. must be considered as the author of the LBD shot” in question. But then comes the question of the legality of the shooting. At the time of the injury, “the police present were exposed to violence, threats and assaults that justify the use of LBDs”, cut the judge.
David Breidenstein had told the France-Presse agency on March 20, 2019, that that day he “walked quietly”: “I had just my yellow vest, my backpack, my cigarette and it is Everything. I was a target. I wasn’t running, I was tired. “
His lawyer, M e arié Alimi, challenged the regular use of the LBD by Marine V., in particular because her shot, with this very precise weapon, had reached the eye of his Customer while it is forbidden to aim above the torso. “If it is likely to think that [Mr. Breidenstein] was not the target, the only circumstance that he has not reached the person targeted is not enough to demonstrate” an illegal job of the LBD, had judged the magistrate.
It was not immediately possible to know the motivations for the judgment of the Court of Appeal. Solicited, M
e Liénard, Marine V. lawyer, did not wish to comment.
Review our video survey (October 17, 2019): How a shot from shooting LBD seriously injured a “yellow vest” in Bordeaux