Suspended prison sentences, of ten months to five years, were requested Tuesday against a former jihadist lawyer and two journalists tried in Paris for having notably transferred funds to members of the Islamic State group, according to them to help them to leave the “
caliphate
” and surrender.
The heaviest sentence, five years suspended, was requested against the former lawyer Bruno V., 50 years old, who went “
from auxiliary of justice to auxiliary of jihadists
”, in the words of the representative of the prosecution, Benjamin Chambre , before the criminal court.
None of the defendants can be accused of adhering to the ideology of the Islamic State (IS), recognized the magistrate.
However, “
it is an indelible stain
” that Bruno V. “
leaves on the black dress that he was forced to take down
,” he criticized.
“
Hired lawyer, then enraged
”, Bruno V. “
lost his footing
”: the defendant, summarized the prosecutor, participated in the corruption of an officer of the Iraqi army to try – in vain – to spare his life of jihadist Maximilien Thibaut during the battle of Mosul in 2017. In addition, according to the prosecution, he was involved in organizing the escape of two jihadist women from a camp managed by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), dominated by the Kurds.
Journalists “dragged into a whirlwind”
The prosecution also requested 10 and 12 months suspended prison sentences against the two journalists Edith B., 43, and Céline M., 44.
Authors of an investigative book on French women who joined ISIS, they are on trial for having transferred funds in order to pay smugglers to "
exfiltrate
" several women from Syria or Iraq - and for also having taken part in the failed rescue operation of Maximilien Thibaut.
The two journalists were “
dragged into a whirlwind which made them lose their bearings, distance, and a certain reason
”, insisted Chambre.
Before the court, Edith B. and Céline M. admitted to having “
gone outside the scope
” of their profession, but they maintained that they had acted out of “
humanity
”, to “
save lives
”.
Such a positioning arouses “
unease
”, commented the prosecutor: “
omniscient
” about jihadism in the 2010s, the two journalists “
thought themselves omnipotent, able to decide who was dangerous, and who could be saved or not
” , he criticized.
The magistrate regretted that the ethical rules of the journalistic profession do not provide for the possibility of disciplinary sanctions in such a case.