Villeurbanne knife attack: the assailant deemed criminally irresponsible


The Lyon Court of Appeal on Tuesday pronounced the criminal irresponsibility and “complete hospitalization” of Sultan Mohamad Niazi, author of the knife attack in the Villeurbanne metro in 2019.

This decision follows the opinions given by three colleges of psychiatric experts, who all diagnosed him with schizophrenia with “unpredictable and dangerous behavior”, and concluded that his judgment was completely abolished during the attack he suffered. perpetrated.

In August 2019, the 36-year-old individual of Afghan origin indiscriminately attacked passers-by at the Laurent Bonnevay metro station with a kitchen knife and a barbecue fork, killing one and injuring thirteen.

Full hospitalization is also the highest measure in the scale of medical constraints that justice can take in the context of hearings on criminal irresponsibility. The investigating chamber also ordered a ban on contact with the victims, a ban on staying in the Lyon region, and a ban on carrying weapons for twenty years.

“The decision applies the fundamental principle of the law which wants that one does not judge the insane ones. The hearing had taken the time to explain and listen with respect for everyone, ”responded Thibaud Claus, defense lawyer. “This decision is a logical continuation of the hearing and the opinions of the experts, it is not surprising”, according to Me Frédéric Lalliard, lawyer for a woman seriously injured in the face.

Indeed, article 122-1 of the penal code states that “is not criminally responsible the person who was suffering, at the time of the facts, from a psychic or neuropsychic disorder having abolished his discernment or the control of his acts” . In this case, the perpetrator of a crime cannot therefore be tried or sentenced. It is in particular by virtue of this article that on April 14, the Court of Cassation had confirmed the criminal irresponsibility of the murderer of Sarah Halimi, who according to psychiatric experts, had been taken by a “delirious puff” at the time of the facts. A case that had revived the debate on this complex legal concept.



Source link -80