Online violence: cyberstalker of journalist Nadia Daam sentenced on appeal to 5 months suspended probation

by time news

The Rennes Court of Appeal on Wednesday slightly increased the conviction of Charlie V., 31, who had harassed journalist Nadia Daam on the Internet. In 2019, the philosophy student and educational assistant was sentenced at first instance by the Rennes criminal court to five months in prison, suspended sentence and 2,500 euros for moral damage. The Court of Appeal finally added a probationary sentence of three years, 4,000 euros in damages and the obligation to submit to psychiatric treatment, for threat of crime against the family of Nadia Daam and in particular her minor daughter .

In November 2017, on Europe 1, the journalist had described a forum as a “bin for non-recyclable waste of the Internet”, during a humorous column already relating to the cyberharassment suffered by two feminist activists on the site Jeuxvideos.com. The next day, she filed a complaint after a flood of hateful messages, including that of the defendant, Charlie V., who threatened “many rapes” of the journalist’s underage daughter.

The defendant did “not question his behavior”, which he equates “to a right of reply” according to the court, this Wednesday. His “worrying” personality added to the seriousness of the facts motivated the sentence. This decision was expected “obviously too long” according to Éric Morain, the journalist’s lawyer, who declared his “satisfaction to see the defendant forced to treat himself and compensate” his client.

“I don’t work the same anymore”

Nadia Daam, who now works at Arte, told the hearing that “everything had changed” after these online attacks. “I received hundreds of messages, death threats, photomontages of me having my throat cut or raped, with the name and identity of my daughter,” she said, moved. “I no longer work the same, it took away part of my freedom,” she confided, also recalling that she had to move after these threats.

Charlie V.’s lawyer, Maître Frédéric Berrien, said “not to fundamentally exclude an appeal in cassation”.

You may also like

Leave a Comment