At the trial of the November 13 attacks, a psychiatrist describes Salah Abdeslam as “engaged by choice in totalitarian dehumanization”

The two teachers Bernard Ballivet and Daniel Zagury who appraised Salam Abdeslam first indicate at the bar of the special assize court of Paris, Thursday April 21, that they had difficulty examining him between 2017 and 2021. Four successive refusals on his part in the seeing him arrive in front of his cell. It must be said that Salah Abdeslam had, during this period, a delusional episode in 2017. Hallucinations, fears of poisoning, obsessions, his strict isolation regime being for many. The disorders disappeared in a few weeks, thewhen his visiting rooms were extended and he had access to a sporting activity. Four refusals of examinations, therefore, then finally, last fall when the trial of the attacks of November 13 has already begun, he lends himself to the exercise, no doubt encouraged by his lawyers. Salah Abdeslam accepts an interview at Fleury-Mérogis.

>> Trial of November 13: the logbook of an ex-hostage of the Bataclan, week 26

The two doctors consider that with the exception of these few specific weeks, Salah Abdeslam does not suffer from any psychological pathology. “It’s the banality of evil”comments Professor Daniel Zagury.

“Participating in barbaric projects does not require being a psychopath.”

While the special assize court in Paris hears this week and until Friday the experts, psychiatrists and psychologists who examined the fourteen defendants, thee Professor Daniel Zaguy says he saw, speaking of Salah Abdeslam, “a young man with easy contact, courteous, who answers questions. A young man who says to himself several times during the interview concerned about his image, he repeats a lot that he has no blood on his hands, that he didn’t kill anyone, hurt anyone. This point is important for his father”. His father in grief, of course, and who already, a few years before the attacks, when Salah Abdeslam was arrested for burglary, had been “completely devastated”, says the accused. Salah Abdeslam when talking about his family with the experts, seemed sensitive, even affected. Which completely echoes Salah Abdeslam, seen at the hearing of theat the special assize court of Paris, Friday, April 15, during his last interrogation. The accused burst into tears when he mentioned, among other things, the pain of his mother.

Experts describe Salah Abdeslam as a man now caught up in a very strong internal conflict. A man who, little by little, from 2012, pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group, renouncing his life before between casinos, cannabis and light life to engage in the service of Daesh. Professor David Zagury speaks “of an ordinary human, engaged by choice in totalitarian dehumanization. His unfailing commitment then rid him of any thought in the first person. And this arsenal, this straitjacket, protected himhe explains. The victims of November 13 were then for him only the targets of a war of which he was the soldier in a legitimate violence. The attacks in Paris respond to the coalition’s bombardments in Iraq and Syria”.

For this expert, the system can crack and there can be, according to him, no half measures. “His return to his humanity can make him take the risk of a depressive collapsehe said. His previous personality is not completely buried and he made it felt during our meeting., continues Professor Daniel Zagury. So, “either he denies the totalitarian camp of the Islamic State group, or he denies himself.“And precisely, at the trial the accused oscillated between arrogance and provocation, sometimes then empathy and humanity the following day. During the eight months of trial, the attitude of Salah Abdeslam evolved in the box. Reciting in September “the radical breviary” of Daesh, then opening over the months, explaining that he no longer supports the image of a monster given to him. “Salah Abdeslam hasn’t cracked yet, but he can crack. Become the little guy from Molenbeek again or remain an unqualified soldier of God. The choice is difficult. It’s painful, but it’s his,” concludes Professor Daniel Zagury in response to questions from the Advocates General.


source site-31