Police Abuse

Protests Over Alleged Rape by French Police Turn Violent

An initial police investigation found the rape of a 22-year-old was 'accidental.'

|

YouTube

The suburbs of Paris have been rocked by protests, some violent, since the alleged rape by police officers of a 22-year-old black Frenchman identified only as Theo—he was arrested during an ID check.

Last night's protests turned violent again, with some protesters reportedly throwing objects at cops and setting vehicles on fire and police responding by using tear gas on crowds of protesters. A group of officers were caught on tape telling protesters they were going to "fuck [them] in the ass."

An initial investigation by police into last week's incident found that the alleged rape was an accident and there was "insufficient evidence" to substantiate the sexual assault claim, The Independent reported. One lawyer argued an expandable baton penetrated Theo's anus "by accident." Police have reviewed a video not made publicly available—one police source told French media Theo's pants "slipped down on their own." Frederic Lagache, deputy secretary general of the French national police union, Alliance Police Nationale, complained that the four officers were "victims of a media flood" and that they were "going to trial before the trial."

President Francois Hollande visited Theo in the hospital after the first riots last week, spending thirty minutes at his bedside. Theo reportedly told protesters to "stop the war and stay united" and said he trusted the justice system to work. One of the four officers involved in Theo's arrest was charged with rape, the other three with assault—they have all been suspended.

Last week, a police spokesperson said eight officers could have been killed in one night of rioting—no police officers were actually reported killed.

France saw riots in 2005 after two African immigrant teens reportedly running from police were electrocuted to death after reaching an electricity substation at a dead end alley—officials eventually denied police were chasing those specific teens.

The anti-immigration National Front's Marine LePen, a candidate for president in this year's election, said in a statement that protesters were "gangs of scum that nothing seems to be able to stop anymore, and certainly not the courts in a overall context of decadence."

Watch a portion of the arrest caught on video and posted online below:

NEXT: Flipping the Script: The Case for Trump

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Accidental Rape is the name of my Warty tribute band.

  2. One lawyer argued an expandable baton penetrated Theo’s anus “by accident.” Police have reviewed a video not made publicly available?one police source told French media Theo’s pants “slipped down on their own.”

    I too have accidentally had a cylindrical object penetrate my anus after my pants slipped down on their own, so I believe it.

    1. OK, one question before I consign “slipped down on their own” to the pile of excuses lamer than ‘the dog ate my homework’; Was Theo wearing his pants halfway down his thighs, in the American Gangsta Nitwit manner? If he was I might – MIGHT – be willing to give “slipped down n their own” a hearing, provided I could see the video.

      1. Was Theo wearing his pants halfway down his thighs, in the American Gangsta Nitwit manner?

        It seemed like around 2010-2012 or so that the trend of kids in NYC’ wearing their pants below their ass sort of peaked and then slowly faded. It seemed most popular with a segment of ‘skinny black hipsters’. it might still be a thing for all i know. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were still popular elsewhere. It wouldn’t be justification for cop-rape, but a few kicks would be understandable.

        1. I recently saw a couple of idiots at a restaurant wearing their pants like that. I thought that shit had run its course, but apparently not. I couldn’t help but hear Denis Leary’s voice in my head: “You’re 18 years old … you don’t know shit about shit, and pull up your pants!”

          1. My pet peeve during those years was trying to walk up subway stairs and having some kids ass literally right in my face. it was made worse by the fact that they were half-hobbled by their pants bunched around their knees, so walking up stairs was a ridiculous effort.

            i don’t mind the ‘retarded fashion’ bits, its just when it makes crowds move slower, its fucking annoying.

            1. You ever seen one of those kids trying to run to catch the bus? It’s comedy gold Jerry!

              1. well, a subway, so yes.

                its like watching Forrest Gump when he had those leg-braces on. their leg motions are side-side and they kind of hop while using one hand to retain their pants from falling completely to the ground

                pointing and laughing at them doesn’t seem to have any shaming-effect.

                1. pointing and laughing at them doesn’t seem to have any shaming-effect.

                  That’s because they have no sense of shame in the first place. Otherwise they wouldn’t leave the house looking like that in the first place.

              2. I saw one of those kids outrun a mall cop. It was painfully comical, and sad at the same time.

            2. trying to walk up subway stairs and having some kids ass literally right in my face

              This, in fact, happened to me last week. I just deliberately let them get a good 10 or 12 steps above me so that my disgust is apparent. Oh, and so there isn’t ass in my face.

        2. It most certainly is still a thing – and it’s hardly restricted to black kids.

          There is a business near me that has a sing in the window saying “Pants around your waist or no entrance”.

          1. yeah i didn’t mean to suggest it was a ‘black thing’. it was always just a teen-hipster thing

            this was funny – seems a parody piece, saying “Black teens start new “No Pants” fashion trend

            The boys, who are natives of Washington D.C., say they used to sag their pants but that trend has “died out.” Justin Jidore, 15, stated “sometimes we get crazy looks and people laugh like it’s a joke, but I think we are being trendsetters. We designed a bunch of our own underwear and wear our looks in public. It’s a great way to get attention for our products.”

            Justin says the trend is already catching on in their area. “At first we were all nervous about how people would react,” Justin stated. “Everywhere we would go people would laugh and call us crazy, but eventually they started to tell us how hot our underwear were ? and asked where they could buy them. It’s become the latest trend in our neighborhood and is starting to spread fast.”

            “Everywhere we go people want pictures with us,” Jordan Albritton, 16, stated. “It’s not all about the attention, but we do love that. It’s about challenging the norm. Society tells us what we should or shouldn’t do, but we do what we want. The look is hot and new. No one has ever done this. Instead of following the trend, we are setting one.

    2. +1 “It was a million to one shot”.

    3. It was a million-to-one shot, Doc!

  3. A group of officers were caught on tape telling protesters they were going to “fuck [them] in the ass.”

    I’m sure it sounds much better in French.

    1. Fun fact: The notorious French love song Je t’aime, Moi Non Plus was about ass fucking, which is why it was banned in several countries.

      “Je vais et je viens, entre tes reins,” if you know what I mean.

      1. This is about sucking lollipops: https://youtu.be/q-iysdFu_TQ?t=21

  4. Is Paris a giant college campus, where guys are always committing rape without knowing it?

  5. Disclaimer – rioting is a Bad Thing, and the rioters are doing Bad Things.

    1. The seriousness of a claim of police abuse has no logical connection to the existence of subsequent riots.

      The incentive system – riot and be taken seriously – needs to be changed so that an investigation into the alleged abuse is postponed until order is restored in the streets and public officials defer comment on the alleged abuse.

      That way the blame can be on the rioters for delaying any official response to the alleged abuse.

      1. The seriousness of a claim of police abuse has no logical connection to the existence of subsequent riots.

        So your solution is to withold action on the former based on the presence of the latter?

        1. Until order is restored, yes. How long should *that* take?

          1. Ah, so you’re not one of those law & order types because those pesky laws keep getting in the way of the other thing.

            1. What?

              I’m saying that politicians love to jump in during the midst of a riot with a so-called “appeal for peace” which involves some concession to the rioters’ demands.

              Hold off the investigation during what I presume will be the few days it takes to restore calm. Then proceed with the investigation as normal. But while people are burning cars, shops, etc., make clear that the priority is defeating the rioters, not mixing up the message with to-be-sures and they-have-a-points.

              1. I read not long ago that there was no connection between riots and the legal merits of the case. So why would you want to suspend the investigation and enforcement of the laws on the basis of something wholly unrelated?

                1. Let me evolve my position a bit – the moratorium should be on official public comment on the case. The investigation can go on to preserve evidence, etc., but no leaks, no “appeals for peace” which mention the underlying grievance (or alleged grievance), no visits to the hospital by elected officials, etc.

                  1. No prime-time addresses about “I feel your pain but this is not the way, I assure you these police will be vigorously prosecuted, etc.” wank wank.

                  2. Define “official public”? Because the rioters aren’t official public.

                    1. Come to think of it, the rioters should be doing anything either.

                      But certainly the mayor, President, governor, whoever, shouldn’t be visiting the hospital or issuing statements other than “our priority is to stop the riots.”

                      Those investigating the underlying incident can keep going, quietly.

                    2. rioters *shouldn’t* be doing anything either

      2. Yeah, fuck due process, amirite?

        1. How long does it take to quell a riot, a few days?

          1. Irrelevant. Due process is due process. The crimes being perpetrated by others do not amtter. Slippery slope and what not…

            I’m sure that you would be fine with having to wait for highly dynamic events out of your control were you ever accused of a crime?

            1. See above – I’m evolving to saying have a moratorium on *public statements* about the case.

      3. A) Unenforceable. What are you gonna do with people who do comment on the subject, or who march in protest without getting violent but getting rowdy? Where do you draw the line between loud and violent, and who draws the line?
        B) Since the rioting is the only activity which even comes close to getting the police investigated, all you would accomplish (if it could be enforced) would be to draw out the investigation until everyone had forgotten.

        Rioting sucks, but in cases like these, nothing else even comes close to holding their feet to the fire.

      4. The possibility of a riot is the incentive for there to be a decent investigation in the first place.

        As in this case, there was an investigation – that came back with the absurd results that the dude was sodomized ‘accidentally’. So the riot.

        Now, maybe the police and government will reconsider and take the public seriously next time around.

  6. the alleged rape was an accident

    I watched that video 3 times and i didn’t see anyone sticking a baton up anyone’s ass. FAKE NEWS

    there’s a jump edit between @0:06 -0:07 which seems to go from “suspect on his back kicking at cops” to “sitting passively and appearing subdued”. and another @0:12-13 that goes from them sitting to being walked off.

    I suppose we’re expected to interpret what “might have happened” during the edited bits?

    It seems odd tho that if someone caught film of the thing that they’d cut any bits out at all. If whats shown there were supposed to be the incriminating parts, it seems pretty weaksauce.

    1. Police have reviewed a video not made publicly available?one police source told French media Theo’s pants “slipped down on their own.”

      1. Police have reviewed a video not made publicly available

        That’s nice. but my point was that this ‘publicly available’ video linked here shows nothing that it indicative of anything incriminating, even non-rape-related “police abuse” that i can see. The first 4-5 seconds seem to be when they’re trying to subdue the guy, and usually the stuff you look for are big arm-swings and kicks that suggest they’re delivering full-power blows to someone who is defenseless. instead it looks like they’re wrestling.

        1. You know what else involves a struggle…

            1. Talk about back assward.

        2. Well I’m sure that video that starts in media res tell the whole story of the arrest. That’s probably why the cops didn’t release the video they have, because it would just be boring.

          1. Well I’m sure that video that starts in media res tell the whole story of the arrest.

            I was saying the opposite = it seems to say nothing.

            my comment was wondering why – if this was a non-cop source that released this – it was edited. If there were bits that were clearly damning to the cops, you’d think those bits would have been highlighted.

            My point is simply “if this is being provided as journalistic evidence of something, then it stinks”; if anything it just raises more questions about who filmed this and why it was edited.

            1. What if it’s being provided as journalistic evidence that Theo was arrested? I didn’t see any claims that the embedded video is supposed to be a smoking gun regarding the rape allegations.

              1. What if it’s being provided as journalistic evidence that Theo was arrested? I didn’t see any claims

                Well, its titled “Moment when “Raped with Baton” Theo arrested by Police”.

                All i was saying is that there’s no “there” there, from what i can tell. I don’t know why you find this observation objectionable. Am i supposed to be outraged by something there?

                1. You appear to be outraged by whoever posted that video not dumbing the title down to your level of reading comprehension. My thoughts and prayers are with you.

                  1. You appear to be outraged

                    uh

                    quote “”If whats shown there were supposed to be the incriminating parts, it seems pretty weaksauce.””

                    And you’re accusing people of having ‘reading comprehension problems’?

                    I pointed out 1) there’s nothing in the video. And 2) its been edited;

                    if its a non-police source, it leaves a serious question about who filmed it and why it was edited.

                    That’s not outrage, hugh. And you haven’t said anything at all useful about any of those points. You’re just being a douche.

        3. instead it looks like they’re wrestling.

          “Wrestling,” eh?

    2. So maybe this case is considered urgent because of the perceived need to appease the rioters?

      Riot-based policymaking really sucks.

    3. The guy’s in the hospital, do we have any information about what kinds of injuries he has? Is it anything that would be consistent with having a baton shoved up his ass?

    4. I’d be inclined to side with you…

      Except for the fact that the response by the French police on the accusation of baton-rape wasn’t “Bullshit, he’s a liar and making it up” it was “Well, sure, it happened, but it was totally like an accident, we swear we didn’t ~intend~ to shove a baton up his ass”.

      Unless the French police are the most incompetent in the world, I think it’s pretty damn certain that it at least happened.

  7. The suburbs of Paris have been rocked by protests, some violent, since the alleged rape by police officers of a 22-year-old black Frenchman identified only as Theo?he was arrested during an ID check.

    Do the french even have rape laws on their books? I’m asking because I learned everything I know about French culture from Pepe Le Pew and a few anecdotal stories of Frenchman cheating on their wives.

  8. “the alleged rape was an accident”

    They didn’t receive affirmative consent, I assume

  9. “One of the four officers involved in Theo’s arrest was charged with rape, the other three with assault?they have all been suspended.”

    Save the riots for if and when the police are acquitted. Right now, they’re effectively protesting four police officers being charged with rape and assault.

    What more can you ask for at this point?

    In the meantime, the riots are playing right into the hands of Le Pen. The first round is in eight weeks, and the runoff is two weeks later.

    1. In the meantime, the riots are playing right into the hands of Le Pen.

      well, that would suggest that there are racists in France, and we both know that’s impossible*

      (*prounounced “im-poss-eeeeb-luh”)

      Racism is an American invention. this was actually explained to me once by a french girl during the riots that were going on in 2005. she said that France’s problem was ‘economic injustice’ and had nothing to do with race.

      1. I’m gonna take this opportunity to mention something about free speech.

        Despite what the progressives say about the Tea Party, we don’t have an overtly racist, anti-immigrant political party in the United States like they do in both France (multiparty) and the UK (essentially two party system). There are a number of reasons for that. I’d argue that one of the big ones is that we have free speech here, and they have hate speech laws over there.

        For years, in America, every time you put a microphone in front of a racist, you get him or her on camera saying something stupid and racist. In France, because of the hate speech laws, the people in the National Front never say anything overtly racist. It gives them the cover of plausible deniability in people’s minds.

        An average voter might say, “Well I’ve never heard anyone in the National Front say anything racist or bigoted!” But how much of that is because it’s against the law to say racist and bigoted things in France? If the National Front is full of holocaust deniers and Islamophobes–how would anyone ever know?

        1. that’s a good point, but something that the left would literally refuse to understand.

          they would argue that (mainly because most of the europe-worshipping progs have never really spent any time there) Europe is “less racist” because they have hate speech laws.

          Basically, unless Govt has a law against something, how are people to know its bad? thats why we need laws against hate speech.
          /prog-logic

          the idea that allowing people to say horrible things has its own social, self-enforcing mechanisms for ‘punishing’ those people (by allowing others to dis-associate, etc) is something they don’t really grasp.

      2. There isn’t anything you could do that’s more marginalizing to the Westboro Baptist Church than give them a microphone and put a camera on them. Marine Le Pen wouldn’t be anywhere near as popular today without the assistance of hate speech laws and laws that make it illegal to deny the holocaust. The National Front would be more marginalized, like the Westboro Baptist Church, if France had free speech and the First Amendment.

        If Le Pen wins, the French should point some of the blame at their hate speech laws.

  10. Totalit? des le circonstances!

  11. Accidental rape? Only cops could think that up. And get away with it.

  12. An initial police investigation found the rape of a 22-year-old was ‘accidental.’

    What, like he tripped and the cop fell?

  13. On Tuesday evening, after a late night session in the Senate, I was driving home when I discovered that I needed to use the restroom, so I drove to a nearby airport. On arrival at the restroom, I met a young Puerto Rican gentlemen. He invited me into his cubicle to talk about Republican Party policy. As I made my way into the cubicle, I slipped upon the wet floor, and in the confusion, pulled down the young man’s pants and briefs. At that point my clothes accidentally fell off. The young man Raul then realized he had lost a contact lens. He then bent over to find it. During his search, he inadvertently backed onto me, and I regret to say a part of my body entered his. At this point the police arrived, and I can see how the events could have been misconstrued. Thank you very much. Thank you.

  14. Accidental Rapist is a stretch too far even for Brad Paisley

  15. Didn’t these cops get the memo? In the 21st Century Muslims rape you. Not the other way around.

  16. Liberte, egalite, butt-rapeite

    1. This isn’t just rape. It is cultural approbation. Forced sodomy is something Muslims do to infidels.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.