Trial Intensifies as Defendants Claim Humor in Cyberharassment of Brigitte Macron

The ongoing trial in Paris of ten individuals accused of cyberharassment against Brigitte Macron, the French First Lady, has highlighted the defendants' arguments and the broader implications of online misinformation. The accused, ranging in age from 41 to 60 and including professionals such as an elected official, gallery owner, teacher, and influencer, face charges related to spreading false and transphobic claims about Macron's gender identity. Despite the malicious nature of the remarks — including derogatory assertions and spreading rumors that Brigitte Macron is transgender — several defendants have defended their actions as "humor," satire, or "information," invoking freedom of expression and "Charlie spirit" in their pleas.

Brigitte Macron filed a complaint on August 27, 2024, triggering an investigation by the Brigade for the Repression of Delinquency Against the Person and subsequent arrests. The false rumors, which have also reached international audiences, notably in the United States, have had a real impact on Macron's well-being and her family, with reports that her grandchildren heard claims that "their grandmother is a man."

Among those on trial are influencer Aurélien Poirson-Atlan, known as Zoé Sagan, scrutinized for previous controversial actions and conspiracy theorist ties, and Delphine Jegousse (aka Amandine Roy), who disseminated a lengthy viral video propagating the gender claim and has exercised her right to silence. The charges include cyberharassment and the spread of misinformation with potential prison sentences of up to two years. The trial also underscores the growing intersection of far-right conspiracy narratives in France and the United States, where the Macrons have pursued legal action against American figures, including Candace Owens, for amplifying the falsehoods.

The presiding judge has noted the significant deterioration in Brigitte Macron's physical and mental health caused by the online attacks. As the trial proceeds, it continues to raise challenging questions about freedom of expression, the limits of satire, and the responsibilities related to online speech and misinformation.