
Brigitte Macron launches appeal in top French court after women who claimed she was born a man were cleared of defamation
On Thursday, the Paris appeals court overturned earlier convictions against the two women for spreading false claims - that went viral online - that Brigitte Macron, 72, used to be a man.
Disinformation on Macron's gender has circulated on social media for years.
Her 24-year age difference with President Emmanuel Macron has also attracted much comment.
Brigitte Macron filed a libel complaint against the two women after they posted a YouTube video in December 2021, alleging she had once been a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux - who is actually Brigitte Macron's brother.
In the video, defendant Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, interviewed Natacha Rey, a self-described independent journalist, for four hours on her YouTube channel.
Rey spoke about the 'state lie' and 'scam' she claimed to have uncovered that Jean-Michel Trogneux had changed gender to become Brigitte, and then married the future president.
The claim went viral, including among conspiracy theorists in the United States.
A lower court in September last year had ordered the two women to pay 8,000 euros ($9,400) in damages to Brigitte Macron, and 5,000 euros to her brother.
Brigitte Macron's lawyer Jean Ennochi told AFP Sunday that her brother, too, was taking his case against the dismissal of the charges to the highest appeals court, the Court de Cassation.
It comes after the two women convicted of defaming French first lady Brigitte Macron by saying she was 'born a man' were sensationally cleared on appeal on Thursday.
Judges sitting at the Paris Appeal Court ruled that Amandine Roy, a 53-year-old clairvoyant, and Natacha Rey, 49 and a blogger, had every legal right to make the sulphurous allegations.
Both had claimed they were subjected to 'intimidation by the authorities' as 'ultra protected' members of the Paris establishment tried to cover up a 'state secret'.
Lawyers for Ms Macron, 72, in turn indicated that she was 'devastated' by the development, and would be taking the case to France 's Cassation Court.
Ms Macron is currently returning from a State Visit to Britain with her husband, President Emmanuel Macron, so was not in court to hear Thursday's judgement.
Ms Roy and Ms Rey had had appeared on a four-hour YouTube video in December 2021 in which they claimed that Brigitte was in fact born as a baby boy called Jean-Michel Trogneux in 1953.
This is in fact the name of Brigitte's brother, and Ms Macron was called Brigitte Trogneux before her first marriage.
The defendants also claimed that Brigitte's first husband, André-Louis Auzière, had never actually existed before his reported death in 2020, aged 68.
A judge sitting at Lisieux, in Normandy, originally fined the two women the equivalent of £1700 each, after finding them both guilty of libel.
Following earlier appeals, Roy's fine was reduced to £850, while Rey had £1300 of her £1700 fine suspended, meaning she had to pay just £400.
Now, neither will have to pay anything, and they will be able to repeat the allegations against Ms Macron.
Maud Marian, defence barrister for Roy, said: 'We're acquitted!', while François Danglehant, for Rey, also expressed great pleasure at the judgement.
The two women, who were not present when the judgment was announced, were sued for defamation by Ms Macron in January 2022.
Thursday's court ruling states that the 18 passages of the video under consideration 'do not constitute defamation', and instead represent 'good faith' free speech.
It comes as Ms Macron finds herself increasingly under attack, not just in France, but across the world.
'Becoming Brigitte', a controversial book about her personal life written by journalist Xavier Poussard, is stirring up conspiracy theories, as is American influencer Candace Owen.
It comes as four male defendants prepare for their cyber-harassment trial at the Paris Correctional Court, after being accused of likening Ms Macron to a child abuser.
The process will focus on 'numerous malicious comments about Brigitte Macron's gender and sexuality, as well as her age difference with her husband which have seen her likened to a paedophile,' said a spokesman for Paris prosecutors.
He added: 'On August 27, Brigitte Macron filed a complaint for cyberbullying, an offense punishable by two years of imprisonment.'
Among the accused is Aurelien Poirson-Atlan, a 41-year-old known on social media as 'Zoe Sagan', where he spreads multiple conspiracy theories.
There are three other defendants in the trial, and all deny the charges.
Juan Branco, defence barrister for Poirson-Atlan, said the prosecution was 'taking an obvious political direction.'
He said it was particulalry outrageous that his client was being kept on remand for what amounted to a published matter of 'free speech opinion'.
Ms Macron has been continuing with the State Visit to Britain, despite the sudden death of her older sister, Anne-Marie Trogneux, 93, less than a week.
This is the main reason Ms Macron has been looking so subdued and uncomfortable with her husband, said an aide who helped organise the high-profile trip.
'Madame Macron adored her sister, and the loss has affected her greatly,' said the source.
'But she agreed that it was her duty to be in the United Kingdom, despite it coinciding with a period of mourning.'
It followed shocking video footage of Ms Macron appearing to slap her husband's face when they touched down in Hanoi for a state visit to Vietnam in May.
The Macrons, who have been married since 2007, both denied any domestic abuse in their relationship, instead attributing the violence to a minor squabble.
The Macron marriage has always been subjected to hurtful speculation because of its beginnings.
It was in 1992 , when the future president was a schoolboy at La Providence high school Amiens, that he first developed deep affection for his drama teacher, the then 40-year-old Brigitte Auzière, who was married with three young children.
Some claim the relationship became a dangerously irresponsible one – allegations both parties have always denied – but Ms Macron later admitted that being romantically linked 'with such a young boy was crippling,' especially in a close-knit, Romant Catholic community.
She spoke of the rumours her own boy and two girls – one a classmate of young Emmanuel – had to deal with, saying: 'You can imagine what they were hearing. But I didn't want to miss out on my life.'
The couple finally wed in 2007, a decade before Mr Macron came from nowhere to win the French presidency as an independent candidate.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
What a mess Crystal Palace's European saga is - and the blame lies with UEFA, writes MIKE KEEGAN
The law is an ass – and with every passing day its enforcement appears to resemble a donkey derby. UEFA first introduced rules on multi-club ownership in 1998. The aim was to prevent collusion. How is that working out? In recent times Red Bull Leipzig and Red Bull Salzburg have competed in the Champions League, as have Girona and Manchester City, who both come under the City Football Group. Why? Because their owners, well aware of the steps needed, ticked the relevant boxes in time. Indeed, when it looked like Nottingham Forest and Olympiakos may both qualify for the Champions League – and potentially breach the rules – Evangelos Marinakis did what everyone else in that position does and placed his shares in Forest into a blind trust. What Palace are guilty of is not colluding with Lyon, who are owned by former major shareholder John Textor, but of failing to play along with the game. Unsurprisingly, they are now in war mode at Selhurst Park ahead of an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The shovels are out and it would appear that the digging is unearthing all manner of dirt. As Mail Sport has revealed, Palace are expected to demand that UEFA hands over what they believe are bombshell emails and texts that exist between the governing body and Nottingham Forest. UEFA introduced multi-club ownership rules to prevent collusion, but that has hardly worked They are firmly of the view that the documents prove that Forest were given extra time beyond the March 1 deadline to comply with the rules. As it turned out, Marinakis was removed as a person of significant control of NF Football Investments, the vehicle that owns the club, on April 30. Should Palace succeed with their demand, they believe the documents would represent the smoking gun they need to present to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) as it would clearly indicate double standards. Furthermore, UEFA's case stands and falls on the March 1 deadline, which was brought forward for this season. Confirmation of an extension for one and not another would at the very least raise serious questions. When Mail Sport asked chairman Steve Parish for his observations following Palace's crunch hearing at UEFA HQ, he declined to comment. However, earlier this week, he took a swipe at the 'beneficiaries'. 'If there wasn't someone who wanted to get in as a consequence, then there wouldn't be a problem,' he told The Rest is Football podcast. 'People have to look at themselves in terms of what they do. Some people say it's fine, some say it's not. I don't have control of that. I have control of the arguments we put forward to UEFA.' But Forest are looking out for, rather than at, themselves, which ironically is the sole thing every Premier League club has in common. At the City Ground they were aware of the initial deadline and of the issue and reacted accordingly, albeit even if they did need additional time. As things transpired, Forest did not qualify for the Champions League and so there may be an element of the red herring. It is impossible not to feel sympathy for Palace and their fans. The enemy here, however, lies at the side of Lake Geneva, rather than the River Trent.


Reuters
4 minutes ago
- Reuters
Explainer: What you need to know about Trump, Epstein and the MAGA controversy
WASHINGTON, July 18 (Reuters) - The 2019 suicide of disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a New York jail cell generated conspiracy theories, fueled by U.S. President Donald Trump's conservative MAGA movement, that he was killed by one of his famous connections. Here are some facts about Epstein and the current controversy: The Brooklyn-born Epstein, a former high school math teacher who later founded consulting and financial management firms, cultivated the rich and famous. He was known for socializing with politicians and royalty, including Trump, Democratic President Bill Clinton, Microsoft (MSFT.O), opens new tab co-founder Bill Gates and Britain's Prince Andrew. Some friends and clients flew on his private plane and visited his Caribbean islands. Trump knew Epstein socially in the 1990s and early 2000s. During the 2021 trial of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, the financier's longtime pilot, Lawrence Visoski, testified that Trump flew on Epstein's private plane multiple times. Trump has denied being on the plane. In 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to a Florida state felony prostitution charge, after federal prosecutors agreed not to charge him with sex trafficking of minors. He served 13 months in jail and was required to register as a sex offender. That punishment is now widely regarded as too lenient. In July 2019, the Justice Department charged Epstein with sex trafficking minors, including sexually exploiting and abusing dozens of girls, in New York and Florida between 2002 and 2005. He pleaded not guilty. Epstein died on August 10, 2019, at age 66 by hanging himself in a Manhattan jail cell, an autopsy concluded. He was never tried on the 2019 charges. Though the New York City chief medical examiner determined that Epstein's death was a suicide by hanging, Epstein's ties to wealthy and powerful people prompted speculation that one or more of them wanted him silenced. In several interviews, Trump left open the possibility that Epstein may not have died by suicide. During the 2024 presidential campaign, when asked on Fox News if he would declassify the Epstein files, Trump said, "Yeah, yeah I would." In February, Fox News asked Attorney General Pam Bondi whether the Justice Department would be releasing Epstein's client list, and she said, "It's sitting on my desk right now to review." Some of Trump's most loyal followers became furious after his administration reversed course on its promise. A Justice Department memo released on July 7 concluded that Epstein killed himself and said there was "no incriminating client list" or evidence that Epstein blackmailed prominent people. The demands by Trump supporters for more Epstein-related documents have caused a rare fracture within the president's base. Supporters, inspired by conservative talk show hosts and podcasters, have said the federal government is concealing records to protect wealthy and influential people with ties to Epstein. Trying to contain the fallout, Trump defended Bondi and accused his supporters in a Truth Social post of falling for a hoax, calling them "weaklings" who were helping Democrats. With backlash from his base not abating, Trump on July 17 requested that Bondi ask a federal judge to unseal grand jury transcripts related to Epstein's 2019 indictment. Even if Bondi asks the judge to release the grand jury transcripts, the ultimate decision is up to a judge. Transcripts of grand jury proceedings are generally kept secret under federal criminal procedure rules, opens new tab, with limited exceptions. If a judge agrees to release the transcripts, it is likely that some material would be redacted, or blacked out because of privacy or security concerns.


Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump escalates EU tariffs deal demands while keeping cripplingly high penalty on a key industry
President Donald Trump is escalating demands that a deal with the European Union on tariffs be reached. The president is reportedly making plans to slap the EU with tariffs of between 15 and 20 percent, as the two sides spar in talks that have caused market anxiety on both sides of the Atlantic. The latest development comes in a report by the Financial Times, which writes that 'hardened stance' would be a minimum tariff that will test the EU trading bloc's tolerance for pain. Trump on Saturday announced a 30 percent tariff to be slapped on imports from the EU and Mexico, in the latest tariff 'letter' announcement after securing only a handful of deals. In that note, Trump once again described a trade deficit – where the U.S. exports more than it imports from a country – as a snub. 'We have had years to discuss our Trading Relationship with The European Union, and we have concluded we must move away from these long-term, large, and persistent, Trade Deficits, engendered by your Tariff, and Non-Tariff, Policies, and Trade Barriers,' Trump wrote. 'Our relationship has been, unfortunately, far from Reciprocal.' That was a reference to the 'reciprocal' tariffs Trump first announced on 'Liberation Day' April 2, only to hit 'pause' after a market meltdown. The FT reports that Trump has been 'unmoved' by the EU's efforts to reduce auto tariffs of 25 percent, and is happy to keep the tariffs where they are as planned, citing people familiar with talks. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has stated the bloc's commitment to dialogue while adding, 'At the same time, we will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required," von der Leyen said in a statement.' President Donald Trump is preparing to impose tariffs of 15 to 20 percent on the European Union, according to the latest report on trade talks with the EU. Trump has been firing off trade 'letters' to various countries imposing stiff tariffs Italian winemakers have warned that a 30 percent tariff is akin to a 'virtually an embargo' on the product. At the start of the trade war, one family importer told the Daily Mail they were facing a $1 million tax hit. German auto industry association BDI called the escalatory move 'incomprehensible,' and told NBC that 'the costs for our companies have already reached the billions—and with each passing day, the total continues to grow.' Americans could face shortages of wine, cheese, and pasta, a European agriculture association warned. French President Emmanuel Macron has also warned of preparing 'credible countermeasures.' The EU has been seeking to resolve the issue through talks – while preparing countermeasures that are getting the attention of U.S. exporters. American whiskey could also take a hit. The Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S. said in a statement this week that the EU suspension of a retaliatory tariff of 25 percent 'on American Whiskey over the last three years has allowed U.S. distillers to begin rebuilding their presence in our largest export market.' 'The EU's decision to put Bourbon back on its retaliatory target list is a serious setback and deeply alarming,' said association president Chris Swonger. 'This decision threatens to undo the hard-won progress made by American distillers and will be a crushing blow to the recovery of U.S. spirits exports to the EU.' U.S. exports to the EU surged when the retaliatory tariff got paused. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday the U.S. won't accept a delay of the August 1 deadline, after Trump in the past bristled at the idea of a TACO trade effect – which stands for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' Michal Baranowski, Polish undersecretary of state at the ministry of economic development and technology, said that, as work continues in a bid to reach a deal, the first part of the EU's strategy is to negotiate with U.S. officials in good faith. While seeking a deal, 'let's prepare for countermeasures in case we don't [reach a deal]. And we have countermeasures on both the steel and aluminium tariffs as well as the initial package of 72 billion [euros] for so-called reciprocal tariffs,' Michal Baranowski, a Polish economy minister told CNBC.