2023-11-22 20:10:13
MISCELLANEOUS FACTS – On November 13, the defamation trial brought by Damien Barraud against France-Soir at the Nancy judicial court. At the heart of the dispute, the forum of the resistant doctor Covid-19 (diagnosis, treatments, vaccine): overview of a scam. On the occasion of this hearing, Dr. Barraud quickly abandoned the field of law, the better to discredit, often through insults, the doctors and scientists who took a different view from his own on the management of the health crisis.
The resuscitation doctor at CHR Metz-Thionville is suing for defamation against an opinion column, in which his name is only mentioned twice. An opinion piece is by nature more subjective than a news article written by a journalist. The various pleadings served above all as reprisals against France-Soir for daring to give a voice to certain scientists, especially Didier Raoult and his teams from the IHU in Marseille, whom Damien Barraud presented as “charlatans”.
“Giving your voice is not necessarily proving yourself right”recalled Me Heringuez, who represented France-evening. The latter highlighted the defense of the freedom of expression of the author who wrote this text under a pseudonym. Obviously, the argument was heavily criticized by the bench opposite, which nevertheless did not fail to abuse its own, both at the bar and on social networks.
Our council has included in the file more than a hundred insulting tweets from Dr. Barraud.
His tweets, submitted to the court, are summarized in this video:
Tweets from Dr. Barraud alias @fluidloading communicated to the courts: pic.twitter.com/tQQnHr39uH
— France-Soir (@france_soir) November 17, 2023
Xavier Azalbert, publishing director of France-Soir also read his private message exchanges with the person concerned. In 2020, the resuscitation doctor at CHR Metz-Thionville refused, with the flowery language we know from him, a proposal for an interview on our set.
Questioned on the stand by Me Heringuez who asked him if he was able to demonstrate skills in epidemiology, Dr. Barraud responded by calling it “tea towel” the conclusions written by his opponent. As for his lawyers, having never sought contradiction, they allowed themselves to insult France-Soir, “conspiracy blog without journalists”.
Mr. Barraud has never demanded a right of reply in our columns. And, when his lawyer asked him if he had been contacted by our newspaper, he replied: “No, and I wouldn’t have answered anyway, I’m not participating in that.“
In reality, very quickly, Mr. Barraud’s lawyers demanded that the anonymity of the author of the column be lifted.“Does anonymity seem compatible with violent comments to you?” asked one of the two lawyers. To which Xavier Azalbert replied: “ The author has the right to give his point of view. He had his reading of the crisis, which can be contested, but we must remember that the doctors who did not agree with Mr. Barraud were harassed.”
Because forFrance-Soir, the role of the resistant doctor, author of the column, was that of a whistleblower in exceptional circumstances of crisis. Exposed to possible sanctions in retaliation from his peers if he dared to openly criticize the management of the crisis, he had no other choice but to remain anonymous. Moreover, Me Heringuez recalled: “Those who disagree with Mr. Barraud are either charlatans or criminal misinformants,” and the person concerned and his advisors did not hesitate to demonstrate this.
The resuscitation doctor accused the IHU-Mediterranean “to do bad science” throughout a trial which suddenly changed its nature. ” In reality, you would have liked this trial to be held between two doctors”, remarked Xavier Azalbert to one of the two lawyers of the opposing party . And not just any doctor.
At the mere mention of hydroxychloroquine, Dr. Barraud sees red. And when the president simply asks him what a randomized study is, he gets offended, forgetting that he is neither dealing with a scientist nor with one of his subscribers on Twitter. “This is the highest scientific proof. The IHU does not know how to do it, they are incompetent,” he replies.“And why do you say that this person (Prof. Raoult, Editor’s note) is a charlatan? “, asks the president. “Quackery is in the public health code. Fakenews on science kills”, he replies, without giving any further explanation.
Dr Barraud had scores to settle this Monday, November 13, and not only withFrance-Soir. However, it will not be up to the Nancy judicial court to say who from the Metz-Thionville CHR or the Marseille IHU provided the best care during Covid…
#Freedom #expression #management #health #crisis #trial #Damien #Barraud #FranceSoir