Why is it a bad idea to leave your cell phone on your bedside table?

AFP

The trial against the attacks on November 13: the time of the verdict after 10 months of hearing

After 10 months of hearing, place for the verdict. At the trial on November 13, the court is due to deliver its long-awaited decision on Wednesday night on the fate of Salah Abdeslam and his co-accused, who since September have been convicted of the worst attacks ever committed in France. The reading of the talks could begin “from 5pm”, President Jean-Louis Périès announced late Monday morning before the special court withdrew to consult in a secret location after a 148-day hearing. Before and in front of a packed room in the Paris courthouse, she had given the floor for the last time to the 14 accused present – six others, including five senior Islamic State officials suspected of being dead, are being prosecuted in their absence. “I am not an assassin, I am not a murderer,” the most important of them, Salah Abdeslam, said from the box, repeating his “sincere” apologies to the victims. “Public opinion thinks I was on the terraces with a Kalashnikov, busy shooting people, public opinion says I was at Bataclan. You know the truth is the opposite,” he said. made 130 dead in Paris and Saint-Denis on November 13, 2015. “If you condemn me for assassinations, you will commit an injustice,” Salah Abdeslam struck. “Blood of the Victims” – The prosecution asked him for the most severe punishment under the Penal Code: life imprisonment with an incompressible security period, minimizing any possibility of release. The 32-year-old Frenchman adopted during the trial “a strategy of constant minimization of facts”, had estimated the three representatives of the National Anti-Terror Prosecutor’s Office (Pnat). But he “tried to blow up his belt” on the night of the attacks and has “the blood of all the victims on his hands”. In a plea to avoid this “slow death penalty,” his defense attorney recalled that the sentence had only been handed down four times against men who are recognized as “psychopaths” and convicted of crimes committed against minors. Salah Abdeslam, who at the hearing claimed that he had given up using his explosive vest “out of humanity”, is “neither a psychopath nor a sociopath”, insisted one of his lawyers, Me Olivia Ronen. He is a “deserter artist”, but the requested sanction is worthy of a “military court”, which judges “enemies” and not “defendants”, insulted his colleague Me Martin Vettes. Me Ronen said Wednesday morning about France info to wait with “hope and concern” on the verdict for his client and called on the court to “share things”. – For the “symbol” – Six years after a night of terror that traumatized France and after a river trial marked by the shocking stories of nearly 400 survivors or relatives at the bar – at nearly 2,600 civilian parties – defense lawyers warned court against the temptation to “extraordinary justice “governed by emotion. On the first day of September 8, the president had wanted “respect for the norm” to remain the “cap” of this “historic trial”, some reminded him and argued against the penalties “elimination”, “revenge” or for “symbol” required according to them by the prosecution. “I ask you to make an effort not to let yourself slip,” Me Orly Rezlan asked. “Justice is not a weapon of wrath,” urged Me Marie Violleau, Mohamed Abrini’s lawyer, “planned” on November 13, but who had given up, as he would do a few months later in Brussels. The verdicts sought against the 20 defendants range from five years in prison to life, especially required for “accomplices” to the attacks, all members of the same jihadist cell whose commandos were “interchangeable” according to the Advocates General. The irreducible life sentence was also requested against Osama Atar, “senior terrorist leader” of the Islamic State group and sponsor of the attacks suspected of death in Syria. Three lawyers acquitted their “innocent” clients. “I am not a terrorist,” one of them repeated in his last words in court Monday. “I’m very scared of your decision,” another admitted between sobs. “The purpose of a trial is also to understand in order to judge as well as possible and to delimit each individual’s responsibility and ensure that (this type of attack) does not happen again. I hope the judges will come to understand what happened and that apply the law as best as possible to get the fairest decisions, “Olivia Ronen declared on Wednesday. mdh-asl-aje-nk / gvy

Leave a Comment