Fraud and deception, as eloquently pointed out by Daniel Haqiqatjou during a recent debate, are concepts that are all too often shrouded in subjectivity and ambiguity.
This allows governments to manipulate the system in order to prosecute those they deem to be their enemies. The vagueness of these notions has been utilized to accuse men of the most heinous of crimes against women, and this has been witnessed countless times throughout the 21st century. It has even been employed to encompass other principles of jurisprudence, such as consent, coercion, and power.
French politicians are a poignant example of corrupt officials who are able to evade accountability for even the most heinous of sexual crimes. That is, of course, when it is in their interest to let it slide. The appeals court’s recent acquittal of Gerald Darmanin, France’s Interior Minister, serves as a stark reminder of the deeply ingrained corruption and moral decay that plagues this liberal system. It just further establishes what is already known about this dirty and rigged game.
France 24 reports:
The Paris appeals court on Tuesday confirmed the dropping of a rape case against Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin, although his accuser said she would keep fighting to have it heard.
Chief prosecutor Remy Heitz said the court had confirmed the abandonment of the case, originating from a 2017 complaint by Sophie Patterson-Spatz that Darmanin raped her in 2009.
The verdict is a boost for Darmanin, 40, a young high-flying figure on the right of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist government who frequently talks tough about fighting illegal immigration and crime.
“For the fifth time in almost six years, the justice system has found that no objectionable act can be imputed to Gerald Darmanin,” his lawyers Pierre-Olivier Sur and Mathias Chichportich said, adding that the minister “will make no further comment.”
The court case at hand is one that has been marred by scandal and deceit. It is a case that has also previously been brought to the attention of our readers. Does this pivotal moment in the proceedings suggest that we were wrong? Let’s delve deeper into the details of this case. Then you, the reader, can come to your own conclusions.
The Huffington Post reports:
First complaint in 2017
Sophie Patterson-Spatz, 50, filed a first complaint of rape against Gérald Darmanin in the spring of 2017, for events that allegedly occurred in Paris in 2009. As soon as she reached the government of the latter, she decided to file a complaint.
In 2009, the complainant approached Gérald Darmanin, then in charge of the legal affairs department of the UMP (now LR), for support when she wanted to review a 2005 conviction for blackmail and malicious calls against an ex-partner. She said he had promised her his possible support via a letter he promised to send to the Chancellery in exchange for a sexual relationship during an evening.
Messaging is at the heart of the file
The complainant and the minister both recognize a sexual relationship. But Sophie Patterson-Spatz believes she was forced to “come to the pot” with Gerald Daranin when he, then 26 years old, would have said: “You too, it will help me. For his part, the Minister of the Interior claims to have “yielded to the charms” of an “enterprising” complainant.
An exchange of SMS between them nine months later is at the heart of the case. Sophie Patterson-Spatz wrote to him: “Abusing your position! For me it’s being a dirty a**hole! (…) When you know how difficult it was for me to f**k you to take care of my file”. Gérald Darmanin replies: “You’re right, I probably am a dirty jerk. How can I be forgiven?”
These are facts that cannot be denied. The legal case against Gerald Darmanin involves allegations of extorting sex in exchange for a legal favor.
RELATED: French Politicians: How Gender Mixing Is Feeding Rape Culture
From the France 24 article:
Patterson-Spatz and her lawyers say Darmanin extorted sex from the plaintiff in exchange for intervening in a case against her when he worked in the legal service of the conservative UMP party — since renamed to the Republicans.
Despite this, the court ruled to absolve Gerald Darmanin, the accused, on the grounds of “consent”:
Darmanin acknowledges having sex with Patterson-Spatz, but says it was consensual.
In 2021 an investigating magistrate said the case should be dropped, finding that Patterson-Spatz’s “sincerity… could not be doubted” but that she had “deliberately chosen to have sex with (Darmanin) in hopes of having her criminal case retried“.
“The law cannot be mixed up with morality,” the magistrate added, saying the plaintiff was “consenting in the eyes of the law“.
It’s not exactly a mystery as to what the outcome would have been if the accused was not a powerful political figure, an individual like Andrew Tate for example. The media would have undoubtedly told a horrifying story of the victim as having been deceived and under duress, and the actions of the perpetrator would have unequivocally been labeled as rape, most certainly not as a consensual act between two consenting parties.
It is a sad and undeniable reality that the French government, led by President Macron, has a shameful history of protecting its political allies in court. There are numerous such cases, including those of Alexandre Benalla, Alexis Kohler and Laurent Bigorne, among others.
Laws that are crafted by corrupt and immoral individuals will always serve to benefit the wicked.
RELATED: Democracy: Is the Population Responsible for Killing Muslims?
In contrast, true justice is based on objective standards that uphold the dignity of all individuals and is exemplified in the supreme Shari’ah, as ordained by a merciful, just, and All-Wise God. Allah’s final Messenger, the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said in a famous hadith:
“If Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, were to steal, I would cut off her hand.”
This illustrates that even one’s closest family members are not above the law, and that true justice does not conflict with morality.
The Shari’ah provides true justice for all and ensures that the dignity of all individuals is protected.
True law and justice are not in conflict with morality. True laws and justice are based on objective standards that defend the dignity of all people, as is due. Real justice is only found in the Shari’ah.
We must denounce all of the perverted and corrupted laws that are voted in by these perverse and corrupt individuals, laws that are designed to benefit the depraved and wicked that wield enough power and influence to be able to get away with it.
As Muslims, it is our duty to wish for and strive towards the implementation of Shari’ah. We must educate those around us regarding the importance, virtues and superiority of the Shari’ah of Allah over all other systems of law and governance.
Then, [after Musa], We have set you, [O Prophet], upon the [straight] course of a Divine Law. Thus shall you follow it. And you shall not follow the whims of those who do not know [the truth]. (Qur’an, 45:18)
RELATED: Latest Arab Youth Survey: Less Democracy and More Shariah Please!
The irony is that he has as second name the french translation of the Arabic name for Prophet Musa (Moussa).
The irony is that he’s anti-Islam but his name itself is a Muslim name, because Jews or Christian in France would not say Moussa but Moïse.
I’ve noticed with plenty of people, even some African American who trash Islam and are “Christians” but are named Omar, Umar, or Aboubakar and stuff like that which are just deformations of the Arabic name. I know it’s meaningless but it’s hilarious
Buddy MANY Muslim names are completely copied from Jewish names.
Abraham – Ibrahim
Jacob – Yakub
Ishmail – Isma’il
Joseph – Yusuf
Job – Ayyub
Solomon – Suliman
David – Daoud
Isaac – Ishaq
Those are the names of very important muslim prophets from bani Israil(people of Israel). They were muslims, tribal origin does not matter in Islam.
I do not have twitter, but @Bheria asked for suggestion. I hope you do not mind me posting it here brother.
Please look at “Saudi Arabia’s Reality”:
I only found this recently and it makes my stomach churn. I never realised it was that bad. I wish I was oblivious to it.
“The law cannot be mixed up with morality,”
So this is what a liberal mindset leads to, absurd statements such as this.
As a side note, does anyone else notice that many Americans treat the US Constitution like how we treat the Quran and Sunna, they worship it, use it to treat what is lawful and unlawful.
“They have taken their priests and rabbis as lords besides Allah.” (9:31)
Muslim Skeptic get this through your head. I am Iranian just like you. It was the Muslim conquests that completely destroyed Persian society and culture and destroyed Persian artifacts and art, and forced cultural Arabism upon us. We already had a religion which was the oldest mothiest religion on Earth.
You forgot to thank Muslims who taught you, pagans, not to worship idols or marry your daughters and sisters.
Funny, because a lot of persians helped the muslim arab conquest and sided with the muslims against the persian king that they had. Also Persian culture flourished and became much more developed with Islam, a lot of the muslim scholars(including scientists,etc) in the Islamic golden ages were persians. Many tribes and people in asia became muslims at the hands of muslim persians that teached them Islam like most turkic people,many parts of south asia, etc.
First of all not to sound entirely negative, I like Daniel videos and I think his doing a good job countering liberalism. Now I do think in this example both the politician and the other girl is to blame. If the girl wanted to she could’ve gone to prison instead of having sex to drop her charge. She just butt hurt about it for no reason. If she was a truly dignified woman she would rather go to prison. If this was under Shariah and I was the judge, I would lash them both.
From a Shariah perspective, they are both fornicators and are to blame. However, from a liberal perspective, he was in a position of power, and she had to do it to have her file accepted. In other words, he used his power to receive sexual favors from her. Corrupt politicians in the government wouldn’t be in trouble for that, but most people would be.
It shows you how legal ambiguity is used to arbitrarily prosecute who you want in that rigged liberal system.