On May 29, the investigating judge concluded that the layman, the author of the shooting, could not be “certainly identified”. The victim is approx
On May 29, the investigating judge concluded that the layman, the author of the shooting, could not be “certainly identified”. The victim appealed the decision.
Justice did not give a place for the two police officers involved in the investigation of Jean-François Martin, an éborgné student who was hit by a LBD in Rennes in 2016, the author could not be “certainly identified”, na-mi learned this Friday with the prosecutor’s office in Rennes.
ALSO READ >> Student éborgné in Rennes: “I’m convinced it’s a flash”
A geography student, then 20 years old, was injured during a demonstration on April 28, 2016 by a shot from an LBD 40 (Launcher Ball Defense) and lost the use of his left eye, which had to be enucleated.
Your support is essential. Subscribe for $1 support us
Two police officers, Nicholas P. and Anthony P., used their weapons at the time of the event and were placed under the status of assisted witnesses for “voluntary violence resulting in permanent maiming or mutilation by an agent of a public authority”.
On May 29, the investigating judge concluded that there was no place, according to the requests of the prosecutor, said the prosecutor of the Republic of Rennes, Philippe Astruc, stating that the victim appealed this decision.
“I expected”
According to the order, the investigations entrusted to the IGPN did not allow “certainly to identify the author of the LBD shooting (…), it will be declared a non-place”. “The use of force was done correctly in light of the violence and attacks that are important committed by protesters against the forces of law and order in a time that is contemporary with the facts,” says the prosecutor.
“I expected, there is a form of fatigue with justice that is very slow,” answered Jean-François Martin. “We’re deploying massive resources to find a protester hidden in the middle of 5,000 people, but we can’t find a police officer with a gun,” loosely there.
According to his lawyer Arié Alimi, “it is a classic defense of a police officer to prevent the identification of the offender, especially in the maintenance of order.” “What is dramatic is that the police were obliged to either name names, or testify against each other, but there is clearly an omerta and it is unfortunate that the investigating judge has extended the hand of silence,” he added.
Read our full file
the police and gendarmerie in France and the discomfort in their ranks,
Police union condemns public subsidy given to David Dufresne’s film Castaner reassures police: “We are here and we will be there to defend you” Investigations have been launched after an officer injured a colleague with a chokehold
In January, human rights defender Jacques Toubon called for disciplinary action against two policemen “for using disproportionate force”. It was pointed out that the police did not “precisely look at the circumstances in which they used the weapon”.
Updated date: June 27, 2020, 8:58 p.m
Categories: Optical Illusion
Source: newstars.edu.vn