Four police officers involved in the death of Cédric Chouviat, who died on January 3 after an arrest in Paris, were heard Wednesday in police custody, before a possible prosecution.
The investigation into the death of CédricChouviatse continues. Four police officers involved in his death following a traffic stop on January 3 in Paris were interviewed in police custody last Wednesday, before a possible prosecution, he said. we learned Monday, June 22, from concordant sources.
The officials were heard at the request of the investigating judge by the National Inspectorate of the National Police (IGPN). The latter, responsible for the investigation, sent the judge the results of his investigations and interrogations.
Asphyxia “with larynx fracture”
It is now up to the investigating magistrate to decide to call the police for any prosecution. Along with the AFP, Thibault de Montbrial, police attorney, did not want to respond immediately.
On January 3, CédricChouviat, a 42-year-old father who worked as a delivery man, had suffered a heart attack near the Eiffel Tower after being shot on the ground, helmet on his head, by three police officers under a tense road control, which had been filmed. A fourth police officer was present.
He was transported to the hospital in critical condition and died on January 5 of asphyxin “with a larynx fracture”, according to the first parts of the autopsy announced by the parquet floor in Paris, which had opened a legal investigation for “murder”.
Family condemns a “police blunder”
With supporting videos, the victim’s family has since condemned a “police blunder” caused by “dangerous” arrest methods. She claims a reclassification of facts as “intentional violence resulting in death”, a crime punishable by murder and police shutdown.
Their lawyers, MesAriéAlimi, William Bourdon and VincentBrengarth, announced that a press conference would be held Tuesday morning at 11am.
A few days after the facts, the Minister of the Interior, ChristopheCastaner, had estimated that the autopsy results “(up) legitimate questions, to which answers (should) be given in all openness”. And to conclude, “s” There are errors that are characterized, we will take all necessary sanctions, “had promised the minister.