Compiègne. AVA activist tried for knocking off hunter’s hat

“If the court found her guilty, it would be astonishing,” considers Stanislas Broniscewski. She had three weeks off. It would therefore be forbidden to defend yourself when you are being beaten…”

“I was a victim of violence for which I still have anxiety attacks and I am judged for dropping a hat.” Gwendoline Guimard, member ofAVAcollective anti-hunting runappears before the Compiègne court For violence against Grégoire Delahaye, hunter of the Futaie des Amis crew. He accuses him of an action that caused his uniform hat to fall off. Violence without total incapacity for work, which occurred on January 18, 2023.

That morning, in Compiègne forestfour members of AVA (Let’s Abolish Hunting Today) follow the hunt with hounds. The deer made the pack run to Vivier Corac, on a public plot during hound hunts.

“They tried to stop the dogs without success,” declared the hunter Grégoire Delahaye, also brother of the stinger from Futaie des Amis. The deer was at the hallali and was going to be served. They were trying to prevent the killing.” Grégoire Delahaye said he clarified to Gwendoline Guimard that she had no right to be there. He does not know if the blow he received was intentional: “I was not injured but my hat fell off.”

“Violence, there was…” indicates the court

“You were on the scene to demonstrate your disagreement with the hounds… indicates Rozenn Lebourdais-Lefer, president of the Compiègne police court hearing, this Friday, January 24. Were you aware that this plot was the subject of a prohibition order?” Gwendoline Guimard, a nurse by profession, says she didn’t know it. She had just joined the collective.

“I didn’t want to hit him, but my action caused his hat to fall,” she says, invoking self-defense. She filed a complaint which was dismissed, which the president does not have on file. The violence she denounces against her resulted in seven days of total incapacity for work. “The court is only seized of the “first facts””, recalls the president. The court will only judge the gesture of the hat.

The court has images from a short video produced by the hunters. “We see that the conservation was animated,” describes the president. Mouths are wide open. And we perceive that your action is voluntary. Violence, there was… It’s not a crime, but it’s a violation. Carrying out this type of action is reprehensible.”

Initially, this complaint against the AVA member was subject to classification under conditions. But the accused did not show up for the meeting with the prosecutor’s delegate who was supposed to remind him of the rules to respect. This is why she is appearing for these criminal acts.

“AVA’s methods are questionable,” says the commissioner

Maître Pierre-Edouard Szymanski, lawyer for Gwendoline Guimard, speaks of an electric atmosphere. He provides videos taken by AVA members on site that morning. “When Mr. Delahaye said “I clarified that they did not have to be there”, the words used were different, while the members of Ava did nothing.”

Compiègne commissioner Francis Vincenti thinks that this viewing is not necessary. “It is true that the context is conflicting,” he agrees. In this police hearing, it is the commissioner who represents the public prosecutor. He sits in the place of the prosecutor. “Last season, there were fewer heated protests. But the previous season, the one that concerns us, there was violence during organized demonstrations. AVA’s methods are questionable, in particular the fact of going to a prohibited perimeter for security reasons.

“AVA’s actions are collective,” describes the commissioner. If you yourself didn’t know where you were, your leaders did. Was there a leader in this group? “No,” replies Gwendoline Guimard.

“Thanks to Gwen for protecting me,” says AVA’s Keely

The court brings in the witnesses. First there is Keely Fisher (that’s her name AVA), who thanks. “I myself was attacked by a huntsman who tried to steal my GoPro,” she says. There were four of us there and on the huntsmen side, there were many more of them. Gwen came to help me because a huntsman told me “if you move, I’ll punch you in the face”. I saw her get pushed and punched. She was in danger. His gesture was a defensive gesture. She pushed him away…” “In a second step,” comments the president, in view of the images.

“Since it was becoming dangerous, we said to ourselves “let’s get out,” continues Keely Fisher. You can hear it on the videos. There are no signs on site indicating that the site is prohibited. There were even followers and photographers who came to witness the killing.” “So, no one respected the order,” notes Master Pierre-Edouard Szymanski.

“Gwendoline found herself in danger,” says Stanislas Broniscewski

Before leaving the bar, she hugs Gwendoline. Stanislas Broniszewski is the second witness cited. “The reason she was there is a bit my fault,” he considers. She stayed because she felt I was in danger. Our only way to protect ourselves is to film for proof. We arrived quickly on scene. It degenerated, due to the morbid excitement of these people at the time of the killing. We stepped back while trying to film. But I was pushed forward and cornered. Someone got on top of me. I got beaten up.”

It was during the “hat” gesture, he believes. “Gwendoline was surrounded by hunters. She stayed behind to help me get through it. And she defended herself. Ava is a peaceful movement created in 2017. Gwendoline found herself in a situation of danger.”

“Are you the leader of AVA?” asks the commissioner. “That’s how the press describes me,” he replies. I didn’t know we were in a restricted area. It’s hard to know where it starts.” “To hear you say, the decrees are useless…” quips the commissioner.

Enter Keaton Louvel, the third witness. “I didn’t want to have a history with anyone. She was pushed several times quite violently. They didn’t let us go. A lady tried to steal one of our phones. I stayed because there were my friends…” “Yes, the context was electric,” the judge repeats. But we judge a single gesture. We see Madame make a gesture which caused the hat to fall.” “What she suffered was much more violent,” considers the witness.

Exemption from sentence required

The commissioner regrets that only one bell will be heard at this hearing. “We would be in the presence of peaceful young people, suddenly confronted with a horde of savages who were preparing to carve up an animal,” continues the commissioner. The reality is that the AVA collective is a collective of agitators, who go out to meet hunters, who are not necessarily open to dialogue at the time of the hunt. This method generates conflicts, even if the cause may seem just to them.” He cites as an example the L214 association, with “less impactful” methods to challenge animal suffering.

The commissioner requests an exemption from sentence, taking into account the context. “It is a minor incident which could have been resolved if the lady had appeared before the prosecutor’s delegate,” he said. This recognized gesture, the intention of which is recognized, took place in a context of violence which was not before the court. However, we must enter into the process of conviction.”

“Double standards”, pleads the defense

Maître Pierre-Edouard Szymanski welcomes this request for exemption from sentence. “There are certain points with which I disagree,” he pleads. We wanted to have the most objective debate possible. We offered you a video of one minute and forty seconds rather than one of eight seconds. We have the impression of “double standards”. The Commissioner is proposing to this collective to take actions that are of no use. Ava is a collective with a peaceful charter. When a hat falls off, it is considered violence. For our part, there are four days of ITT and four complaints closed without further action (for violence and theft). Because for the prosecution, it is not violence. Is this indelicate gesture violence?

Very disturbed by this event Gwendoline Guimard is the last to speak. “Being there for a hat drop, I don’t understand. It disgusted me to receive the summons. I still have pain and I am traumatized. I found myself stuck in a place I couldn’t leave. Although that’s just what I wanted. And even when I left, someone snatched my phone and tried to throw it in the water.”

The police court will deliver its deliberations at the police hearing on March 28.