the logbook of a former Bataclan hostage, week 29

Since September 8, 2021 the trial of the attacks of November 13 is held in Paris. David Fritz-Goeppinger, victim of these attacks is now a photographer and author. He agreed to share via this logbook his feelings, in image and in writing, during the long months of this river trial, which began on Wednesday September 8, 2021 before the special assize court in Paris. Here is his account of the 29th week of hearing, the one that sees the start of the indictments.

>> The journal of the twenty-eighth week

Wednesday, June 8. After a few coffees quickly exchanged place Dauphine with Gwendal, we rush into the Palace via the dedicated entrance, rue du Harlay. Although there are many journalists and many victims, it is not the crush that I imagined. To tell the truth, I wonder if the Internet radio is full.

Here we are. We are at this moment when the public prosecutor will speak on the facts as well as on the ten months of hearing. Curious, I look for the word “indictment” in the Larousse: “1. Pleading of the public prosecutor before the criminal judge in order to request the application or not of the criminal law towards the defendant or the accused. As each time a new shutter opens with the audience, I go in the large room. The gentle crowd that reigns there reminds me of the early days. The defendants are all busy discussing with their lawyers, the scene gives me the impression of being in a movie. I’m chatting with Aurélie Silvestre and a lawyer friend when the bell rings. The silence that follows is unequivocal: the audience is moving forward and so are we.

We are seated near the courtroom, in the fourth row. I don’t think I’ve ever been so close to the Court. The president arrives, solemn, and announces the resumption of the hearing and after a civil party constitution, invites Camille Hennetier to start what we have all been waiting for for months, years. The Advocate General (difficult to recognize since without a mask) begins by returning to the facts, the hearings of civil parties, even cites some. Through this introductory remark, we feel that the three Advocates General were particularly touched by our testimonies at the bar and also, and simply, touched by the trial. Despite my desire to listen, I find it difficult to follow as the subject is dense and contrasts with the timed interventions of the last few weeks.

After a half-hour speech, the Advocate General gives the floor to her colleague, Nicolas Braconnay, who continues the introductory remarks to the indictment. The projection in the hall of auctions encounters some technical problems, I run to the main room to continue to follow his intervention. The benches are crowded with people, the room has gradually filled up. Nicolas Braconnay returns to the psychological profile of the accused and their experiences. He also returns to an interesting point, little discussed during the hearing: ideology. To illustrate his point, he quotes Hannah Arendt (and specifies that she was often quoted at the hearing): “The logic of an idea, an idea that detaches itself from how ideas work, and ends up adopting its own logic, which goes crazy in the sense that it no longer recognizes things that can stop it. ” And to specify: “What ideology are we talking about? The one that concerns us is clearly identified. She complacently displays herself in texts, videos, nasheeds.” Nicolas Braconnay continues his real presentation on radicalization and jihadist ideology. On the subject of jihadist Islamism, he gives a definition of rather rare accuracy (at least for me): “This doctrine which intends to submit the entire social space to the most retrograde rules (…) which imposes religion through violence, combat, in order to eliminate any element considered impure.” Shortly after, the lawyer asked the president to suspend the hearing, a request accepted by Jean-Louis Périès.

Angry, I pull myself out of the auction room. Why anger? Because I would like to have the strength and the professionalism to be able to transcribe word by word what I hear from the requisitions. But as always, I can’t, or not completely. However, I know that I am not a journalist, I know it. I don’t have a loop, I don’t have an editor. It’s not my job. But although I am aware of it, there are days when this lifeline (which is in fact a mirage), which allows me to hold the reins, is unattainable. It is in these moments that I taste bitterly the chance to keep this diary. Journal that gives me the opportunity to express myself freely and without constraints on what I live, without owing anything to anyone, even to me. To pass the time, I walk around the Palace and try to keep my anger at bay.

The least we can say is that this start is particularly dense and that I am not the only one having difficulty following the audience. The readings, like that of Nicolas Le Bris, which push the technicality of the file to its climax are difficult to follow, even more so for lay ears like mine.

It is 7:30 p.m. and Nicolas Le Bris continues to read his indictment. I stay, but stop there writing this post.

Until tomorrow.