Six people judged for having participated in the organization of a rave party without authorization on December 31, 2020 in Lieuron (Ille-et-Vilaine), in the midst of the Covid-19 crisis, were released Monday evening by the criminal court of Rennes.
According to the president of the court, the elements in the file did not make it possible to determine that the six men aged 24 to 30 were the organizers of the rave party, due to a lack of convincing evidence before the event.
Even if the involvement of five of the defendants in the rental, movement and concealment of a generator was recognized by the court, the latter did not consider this sufficient to consider them as organizers and convict them.
Nearly 2,500 revelers
The three prosecuted for “concealment” and the use of license plates were also acquitted. This is a “legitimate” decision corresponding “to the elements of the case”, reacted Me Rémi Cassette, defense lawyer.
For this New Year’s Eve, in the midst of a health crisis, between 2,000 to 2,500 people gathered in private hangars for a rave party, in Lieuron, a small town in Ille-et-Vilaine, despite the cover. fire then in effect from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. The event, quickly publicized around the world, caused a real outcry in a context of threat of a new outbreak of the Covid-19 epidemic.
Law enforcement officers stoned
The police, who had tried to oppose the installation of the party, had been subjected to “throwing of stones, logs, wood, glass bottles” and one of the gendarmes’ vehicles had been set on fire. .
The prosecutor, after recalling that the Covid-19 epidemic had “not been pleasant for anyone”, had requested fines ranging from 800 to 1,500 euros for all the defendants for the organization of the rave party. Also requested were 60 day fines of 10 euros for receiving stolen goods for two of the defendants.
The five defense lawyers denounced in their pleadings “media and political pressure” and disproportionate decisions. Me Cassette’s client was notably placed in pre-trial detention for twenty days. “The only explanation I found for this reaction was that there was a desire to have a response displayed in the media,” said the lawyer.
