Since the killing of the 17-year-old, last Tuesday, by a police officer in Nanterre, France has faced a large wave of riots and violence in various cities. Faced with this delicate situation, the lawyer for the Nael family, Yassine Bouzrou, focuses on proving intentional killing in the absence of a danger that justifies self-defense.
Six days after Nael’s death, the Ministry of Interior continues to mobilize thousands of police officers across the country, fearing a possible return to violence and riots, especially since the Minister of Justice indicated the need to “exercise caution.”
On the other hand, Nael’s friend, the teenager who was sitting in the front of the car alongside Nael and was fleeing because he was terrified, appeared to confirm what came in the video that was posted on social media and sparked anger in the French public street.
The Israeli army invades Jenin, and France loses millions
According to the account of the third passenger in the car, who broke the silence to present his version of the facts in a testimony published in “Le Parisien”, the motorcycle policeman who was near the window asked to turn off the engine and hit Nael for no reason, using the hard part of his glove, and then the second policeman by hitting him the same way as well.
According to the teenager, Nael was then “stunned” and “terrified” and “could not do anything, not even speak. Then the policeman asked Nael to turn off the engine or he would put a bullet in his head.”
While Nael was feeling a little dizzy – according to the teenager – his foot moved off the brake pedal, and at that time the policeman near the window said to his colleague: Shoot him. Indeed, the second policeman shot Nael.
The lawyer for the Nael family, Yassin Bouzrou, said in his statement to “Sky News Arabia” that “from a legal point of view, the police officer does not have the right to shoot at the car, even if there is a refusal to comply. The police officer has the right to use his firearm only if he is in a state of defense.” The person or his life is in danger. This is not the case in Nael’s case.”
Therefore, the lawyer filed three legal complaints against the police, the first accusing the policeman who opened fire of premeditated murder, and the second accusing the accompanying policeman who ordered him to shoot, accusing him of being complicit in the murder and then giving false testimony.
The lawyer considers that the video clip filmed by a witness is an “essential and important element” in the investigation because it “allows us to see the details of the incident and refute the police’s story.”
However, Bouzrou says, “This clear evidence does not allow for the acceleration of investigations that take a long time in France, especially when they are against a member of the police. The duration of the investigation may exceed 10 years. This is something that French justice intends, because the longer the period, the more the policeman benefits.”
On the other hand, he acknowledges that “the current protests in France will not change the course of things, they only initially prompted French justice to take matters seriously, but mostly, investigations into such files are done poorly and last for a long time, and the results are often disappointing.” .
And if the police officer who apologized to Nael’s family is proven guilty of premeditated murder, he faces up to 30 years of criminal imprisonment.
#Naels #lawyer #Investigations #files #conducted #poorly
2023-07-04 05:31:07
