Jihadist Peter Cherif sentenced to life imprisonment due to the “extreme seriousness” of the facts and his “dangerousness”

After seven hours of deliberation, the special assize court of Paris declared the jihadist Peter Cherif guilty of all the facts with which he was accused, Thursday, October 3, at the end of the day, and sentenced him to life imprisonment, accompanied by a security period of twenty-two years, in accordance with the requisitions of the public prosecutor.

The president of the court, Frédérique Aline, specified that this 42-year-old jihad veteran was ” guilty “ of having joined Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in Yemen for seven years, which was not disputed, ” guilty “ of having been one of the jailers of three French humanitarian workers detained by this group in 2011, which he partly admitted at the hearing, and ” guilty “finally, to have “participated” to the recruitment by AQPA of his friend Chérif Kouachi to commit an attack against Charlie Hebdowhich he always denied.

Concerning this last aspect, the only one really contested, the court considered that Peter Cherif had ” ease “ the arrival of Chérif Kouachi in Yemen and his “integration into the ranks of AQAP” in the summer of 2011, and that he had remained in contact with him after the latter’s return to France, having “knowledge of the terrorist mission entrusted to him”. She justified the“extreme severity” of the sentence pronounced by the“extreme severity” facts and “dangerousness” of the accused.

A “resigning defense”

This trial was marked, throughout its three weeks of hearing, by the astonishing discretion of the defense. A few hours before the verdict was announced on Thursday morning, we almost discovered the sound of the voices of the accused’s two lawyers. “Finally, finally the time has come to defend Peter Cherif”sighed, in a curious confession, M^e Sefen Guez Guez, opening his pleading. In fact, apart from a few interventions even rarer than those of their client, M^e Guez Guez and his colleague M^e Nabil El Ouchikli were conspicuous by their absence during these fourteen days of hearing.

This absence of words even transformed into absence itself, during three days that were nevertheless central to this trial: the two lawyers were replaced by a young colleague then by a young colleague, who knew neither one nor the other the file, the day of the first interrogation of Peter Cherif on the merits, but also during his second interrogation, as well as the first day of the testimonies of the civil parties.

An incomprehensible empty chair policy, and above all remained unexplained, which the president regretted on September 27: “Contrary to custom, I find out every day whether Peter Cherif’s lawyers will be present or not. I’ve never seen that…” During his indictment on Wednesday, the public prosecutor castigated a “defense as light as intermittent, even resigned, which did not do justice to the debates”.

You have 52.21% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.