Sentences ranging from two years in prison to six years in prison were requested on Wednesday against seven ultra-left sympathizers tried since October 3 before the Paris Criminal Court for terrorist conspiracy.
The heaviest sentence, of six years in prison, was requested against Florian D., the main defendant in the case, accused of having “aggregated” around him five other men and a woman to prepare violent action against forces of the order. All dispute the accusations.
A ban on possessing a weapon for ten years was also requested against all defendants, and for some a fine of 1,500 euros.
One man’s project
“This file is above all that of Florian D.,” said one of the two representatives of the National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor’s Office during his requisitions. “It is less a question of a group than of a radicalized man who aggregated his comrades.”
“His actions are part of a continuity and a logic: he is preparing for armed struggle, for preparing violent action against the forces of order,” asserted the other representative of the public prosecutor, insisting on the fact that it was he who “carried” the terrorist project, to which the others were then added. However, no imminent action was envisaged, according to the anti-terrorism investigating judges.
For almost five hours, the two prosecutors returned to the “addition of probative material elements” of the file, which can only be read “as a whole”.
Products used to manufacture explosives and weapons
At the origin of the file, an internal intelligence report on a violent action project fomented by ultra-left activists, and in particular by Florian D., a libertarian activist now aged 39, having fought in 2017 with Kurds from the People’s Protection Units (YPG) in Rojava (northeast Syria) against the jihadist group Islamic State.
After several months of surveillance and listening, the suspects were arrested on December 8, 2020, in various locations in France, then indicted. During the searches, the police found products used to manufacture explosives and weapons.
The defendants are suspected of having engaged in “tactical progression and shooting training” and of having manufactured and tested explosives with a view to attacking police officers or soldiers.
During the debates, they disputed these accusations. Acknowledging having tested explosives and playing a few games of airsoft, the defendants recounted “fun” sessions carried out particularly during confinement, without any malicious intent behind them.