the Sorbonne student who “pulled the pants” of a sensitive classmate contests his sanction

See my news
Follow Paris News

He was corrected. The Paris administrative court disavowed a law student from the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, who contested the legality of the sanction which was imposed on him in June 2023 after he had made “flips” and “wrapped his finger around the panties” of a fellow victim of sexual violence in the past.

“Acts committed outside the university”

For these facts, the applicant received a simple suspended exclusion of eighteen months, but he preferred to take legal action to have this “disproportionate sanction” censored, which was based on facts presenting “a lying character “. “They are not likely to be classified as sexual assault,” considered his lawyer.

“The events took place outside the university and have no connection with the functioning of the establishment,” explained the Parisian council. If the disputed facts were able to cause disruption in the functioning of the university, it was through the choice of Mrs. X. to give them wide publicity. » The procedure followed by the Sorbonne “was not preceded by any preliminary investigation” and exposed its client to “ a vindictiveness which violated his dignity”, also complained the lawyer of this student then in the first year of his degree.

His client criticized the university for having done “opportunistic use”of his disciplinary power to wreak “vengeance against his father”. The student therefore wanted the Paris administrative court to “injunction” the university to “post” the judgment “within the university and on its intranet space”: the sanction hitting him had in fact already been published “anonymously” in the same places.

The student admitted the facts

“The circumstance that MX was elected from the Puls union – of which [le requérant] maintains that he had an enmity with his father – and head of the university's Department of Languages, at the high nuisance capacityis not in itself likely to constitute an objective reason to question its impartiality”, begins by evacuating the court in a judgment dated October 2, 2024, which has just been made public.

The decision also stated that the law student had “admitted” to having “wrapped his finger around the side of the panties” of his victim and that this gesture had “prompted the hasty departure” of the latter from the “ party” that he organized at his mother’s house on February 24, 2023. “This gesture, given his inappropriateness with its possible repercussions for Mrs.

“The alleged facts concern two university students and wereconsequences on schoolingof Mrs. These facts led several students to take sides for or against Mr. XXX. »

The student, for her part, had declared that her friend had started to “fuck her” while she was facing away, before “sliding his hand into her pants” and “pulling down her panties twice”. “These facts, not consented to, were at the origin of insomnia and anxiety attacks as well as a modification of the medication protocol prescribed by his psychiatrist,” notes the Paris administrative court.

A “changing” version of the victim

In his defense, the applicant had put forward the “changing” version of his accuser and had explained it by “his alcohol and drug consumption» and “previous acts of sexual violence of which she was a victim”. “He also relies on certificates from people present, including that established by another participant who, playing video games at the time of the incident, indicates “not having seen or heard anything suspicious which could have challenged him,” summarizes in a few words the administrative court of Paris.

But “if […] Ms. […] give a “disproportionate” interpretation of the facts and would have varied in his description of Mr. the materiality of the facts,” he retains.

” Moreover […]MX – who does not avail himself […] than a friendly relationship with the person concerned […] – heard several timesapologizefor his behavior, from the start of the play by Ms. “It also emerges from the systematic terms […] of MX that he had heard “testing the limits” with Ms.

Finally, if the law student maintained that these facts could not be qualified as sexual assault to the extent that the student “withdrew” her criminal complaint, this classification “was not retained by the disciplinary committee » and his argument is therefore “ineffective”. He had until December 2, 2024 to appeal the judgment.

/ED (PressPepper)

Follow all the news from your favorite cities and media by subscribing to Mon Actu.