The story is no longer the same. Not at all the same. After several thousand pages of reports, expert opinions and summary reports, the two investigating judges closed the investigations this summer. Each party can now make observations and await the final indictment from the prosecution. JDNews has delved into the investigation file. The same one that is currently being examined by the two judges who will have to determine whether the “serious and consistent evidence” can be transformed into “charges” strong enough to send the police officers before a court. At this stage, Florian M., the police officer who fired the shot, is indicted for murder. His colleague, Julien L., who was at the window of the vehicle and who was trying to prevent Nahel Merzouk from restarting, is placed under the status of assisted witness for complicity in murder. Charges punishable by the assize court.
From photos of the reconstruction to those of the autopsy, from reports by experts from the National Gendarmerie Criminal Research Institute (IRCGN) to hearings by the National Police General Inspectorate (IGPN), from ballistics tests to those carried out on the Mercedes… The initial version that was imposed in the media and that was sometimes brandished by the rioters to justify their violent actions was shattered by the investigation. The civil party declared untruths, approximations and sometimes even lies in the press. Here, point by point, is how the investigation file overturns the story constructed by the biased view of a video of a few seconds broadcast on social networks.
The police did not beat Nahel Merzouk
Several witnesses and the front passenger of the Mercedes continue to claim that Julien L. hit Nahel Merzouk during the car check, passage Arago, in Nanterre, on June 27, 2023. However, the autopsy is formal. The only two traces of injuries on the teenager’s body, apart from those caused by the police officer’s shot, are two bruises “brown-yellow” located at the top of the right arm. Therefore inaccessible to Julien L., accused by the civil parties of having struck the teenager’s left temple and nose with a rifle butt.
Furthermore, the medical examiner dated the presence of these “blue” has “at least 18 hours” before the death of Nahel Merzouk. Incompatible, therefore. To make sure, JDNews obtained photographic plates of the young man’s face, torso and left profile taken during the autopsy. There are no traces or wounds. Including on the inside of the scalp. “The face has few soft parts. […] A blow to the face or skull with a rifle butt […] will immediately cause a bruise. […] Nothing of the sort has been observed.”assures the specialist.
Nahel voluntarily restarted the car
This is what Farid B., the front passenger of the Mercedes, declared on July 3, 2023 in front of an IGPN police captain: “And as [Nahel Merzouk] protected himself [des soi-disant coups de crosse du policier, NDLR] and he was a little dazed, his foot slipped off the pedal and the car started to move forward. That’s when the policeman fired.” The young man, then aged 17, repeated his statements during the reconstruction on 5 May. And this, despite the unequivocal assertions of the automobile expert. Four successive actions were carried out by Nahel Merzouk, he describes, to restart the car: he pressed the ignition button at the same time as pressing the brake pedal with his foot, he engaged the Drive mode of the automatic gearbox control lever, then he accelerated slightly with his foot. “The restart of the vehicle could only have been the result of a voluntary action”the professional decides.
More after this ad
The car exceeded 90 km/h six times and reached a maximum speed of 116 km/h.
The police officer’s shot was probably deflected by the moving vehicle
This strong argument could overturn the voluntary homicide qualification retained against Florian M. The latter, who was consistent in his statements, denied having aimed at the upper body. Moreover, during the reconstruction, the ballistics specialists noted that in the static phase, the police officer’s weapon at the time of the shot was aimed lower than the measurements recorded during their expert assessments. “The movement of the vehicle can therefore be the cause […] of a displacement of the impact towards the top of the windshield and therefore of a translation of the trajectory upwards”note the IRCGN gendarmes. The same observation was made by the automobile expert: “The shift in firing upwards and to the left may have been caused by the vehicle being in motion.”
“The police officer was not in danger”, really?
This sentence was pronounced as an implacable truth by Nabil Boudi, the lawyer of Nahel Merzouk’s mother, on May 6 on RTL, the day after the reconstruction. He relies on a sentence from an expert who considers that “setting in motion [de la voiture] did not pose an imminent danger to police officers. […] There was no risk of crushing, the acceleration was of low intensity [la voiture a terminé sa course à une vitesse estimée à 17,98 km/h, NDLR] ».
However, on the day of the reconstruction, precise measurements were taken of the positioning of the two police officers’ feet between the wall and the car. According to the automobile expert, 33 centimeters separate Julien M.’s right foot from the low wall behind him. 31 cm according to the version of Farid B., the front passenger. And 36 cm according to the police officer. A consensus to within 5 cm. “When I felt the vehicle start to move again, I felt myself start to move too, my colleague had his arms in the passenger compartment and also for his protection, I fired a shot to prevent us from being carried away or trapped against the wall, or rolling over it. I could very well have tripped and gone under the rear wheels.”justifies Florian M. in hearing.
Lives saved thanks to police intervention?
Farid B., the front passenger already known to the police for two-wheeled rodeos, himself admitted this during his interrogations: “We had turned off all the modes in the car with the settings […] so that when driving, the car holds the road and does not skid.” In plain language, this shows that the minors intended to drive fast. And they did. The driving during the chase that lasted 2 minutes and 40 seconds through the streets of Nanterre is described by experts as:“unconscious” and of “dangerous”. The car traveled 3,081 km at an average speed of 69.5 km/h. The car exceeded 90 km/h six times and reached a maximum speed of 116 km/h. In the middle of the city, between 8:16 and 8:19, at the time when people were going to work. According to the analysis of video surveillance images, Nahel Merzouk almost hit at least two pedestrians and brushed a cyclist by a few centimetres, miraculously unharmed.
The police did not lie
This is probably what partly sparked the indignation and set certain neighborhoods ablaze. A few days after the events, the lawyer for Nahel Merzouk’s family, who was Yassine Bouzrou at the time, filed a complaint for “forgery of public documents”. He suspected the police of having settled on a fallacious version according to which the teenager had tried to run over them. This complaint, which was essentially based on a police intervention sheet, was attached to the investigation. A sign that the judges considered the accusations to be unfounded from the start, they never ordered any investigation into this matter or even asked the police a single question. But too late. The poison of suspicion had been injected into the police force’s version. Now it’s time for the antidote of the facts and objective elements of the case.
Related News :