Skip to content

“I was not there on the day of the cartoons.” The schoolgirl who had accused Samuel Paty of Islamophobia confessed, during his police custody and then before the anti-terrorism judge, to have lied and not to have been present when the teacher had given class on freedom of expression, reveals this Sunday The Parisian.

In her first version, the schoolgirl first said that the teacher allegedly asked Muslim students to leave the classroom so that he could show a cartoon of the naked prophet Muhammad published by the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. She would then have shown her disagreement with this approach, which would have led the establishment of Conflans-Sainte-Honorine (Yvelines) to exclude her for two days.

Lie to his father to justify an exclusion

A lie invented from scratch so as not to reveal to his father the real reasons for his exclusion – linked, in fact, to his chronic absenteeism. In front of the investigators, the young girl has for a long time maintained her version of events. But when it was established that she was not in class that day, she had to resolve to admit the facts. And confessed that she had heard of this educational sequence only from another student.

The 13-year-old said she started to cry when she learned of the death of her teacher. Samuel Paty was assassinated on October 16 by a radicalized young man of Chechen origin for “avenging the prophet” Muhammad, after several days of controversy, strongly fed by the father of the schoolgirl and Abdelhakim Sefroui, an Islamist activist on file S. “If I hadn’t said that to my father, there would not have been all that and it would not have taken this magnitude ”, regretted the young girl in front of the anti-terrorism judge.

“He understood that he had been instrumentalized by his daughter”

“His lie was untenable. From the moment she recognizes that she lied, you have to find reasons. Are these explanations of circumstance? », Asks the family of Samuel Paty, interviewed by The Parisian.

The young schoolgirl was indicted on November 25 for “slanderous denunciation”; his father for “complicity in a terrorist assassination”. “My client has taken a step back, he has nightmares every night. He understood that he had been instrumentalized by his daughter who lied to him, even if it was difficult to accept, ”notes the father’s lawyer. Twelve other people are also indicted in this case..

Support a professional editorial staff at the service of Brittany and the Bretons: subscribe from € 1 per month.

I subscribe

Source link