Attack on Prisca Thévenot: Twenty-three months in prison for one of the perpetrators

Considered the main instigator of the violence, a 21-year-old man was sentenced on Wednesday evening, July 30, by the Nanterre Criminal Court (Hauts-de-Seine) to twenty-three months in prison after the attack in July 2024 on MP Prisca Thévenot (Renaissance) and members of her team during the legislative campaign.

This sentence is accompanied by eighteen months of suspended probation and several obligations and prohibitions. The prosecution had requested a three-year prison sentence. The defendant was charged with repeated violence, aggravated by grouping and the use of a weapon, as well as damage to a vehicle. He appeared in pretrial detention.

The incident dates back to July 3, 2024, during a poster-pasting operation in Meudon-la-Forêt, a few days before the second round. Prisca Thévenot, then a candidate for re-election, was accompanied by her alternate, Virginie Lanlo, and two activists. They were then attacked by several youths, including the defendant, who tore down their posters.

The altercation quickly escalated: around twenty individuals, mostly minors, joined the group at the call of the main accused. At the hearing, the latter admitted to having punched one of the activists, Madiba Ousmane Guirassy, but denied any other violence.

He denied being the author of the scooter blow that fractured Mr. Guirassy's jaw, who also injured his knee, stomach and hand. He also denied attacking ^Ms. Lanlo with the scooter, who was hit in the arm and whose car windshield was damaged during the violence.

The young people "came to fight," ^Ms. Thévenot told the court. "They were waiting for an indication of who to hit," added the former government spokesperson, referring to the "lynching" suffered by Mr. Guirassy. Deeply moved, the Hauts-de-Seine MP confided that she had been "living in fear" since the events and had questioned whether she would continue her political commitment.

The defendant's lawyer, ^Mr. Ilyacine Maallaoui, acknowledged in his plea that his client was "abysmal idiocy," while rejecting any political motivation. The court emphasized in its judgment that the victims "were working for the smooth running of democracy." The lawyer for the civil parties, ^Mr. Arthur Gaulier, for his part regretted a "smell of unfinished business," pointing out the absence of a "sincere confrontation," despite the defendant's apologies.