Kim Kardashian's Paris robbers found guilty
Eight individuals have been convicted in connection with the high-profile armed robbery of US reality star Kim Kardashian during Paris Fashion Week in 2016.
The verdict, delivered Friday by a French court, found that the group was responsible for stealing over USD 10 million worth of jewelry from Kardashian, including her diamond engagement ring. Four of those convicted were directly involved in the heist and received prison sentences of up to eight years — most of which were suspended. Due to time already served and health considerations, none of them will return to prison. Two defendants were acquitted.
"The crime was the most terrifying experience of my life, leaving a lasting impact on me and my family," Kardashian said in a statement following the ruling. "While I'll never forget what happened, I believe in the power of growth and accountability and pray for healing for all."
The armed robbery took place during the early hours of Oct. 3, 2016, when Kardashian was staying at the Hotel de Pourtales in central Paris. Dressed in police uniforms, the attackers forced their way into her private suite after subduing the hotel receptionist. Kardashian was held at gunpoint, tied up, and locked in the bathroom as the assailants fled with a trove of high-value jewelry.
DNA evidence linked Aomar Ait Khedache, 69, and Yunice Abbas, 71, to the crime scene. Both men admitted their involvement. Khedache, who is now deaf, mute, and physically disabled, received an eight-year sentence, five of which were suspended. Abbas, who suffers from Parkinson's disease and recently underwent heart surgery, was sentenced to seven years, with five suspended. Two others, Didier Dubreucq and Marc-Alexandre Boyer, 35, received similar sentences.
With several defendants in their 60s and 70s, French media dubbed the group the 'Grandpa robbers,' a label that prosecutors and civil parties strongly rejected. Prosecutor General Anne-Dominique Merville urged the court to look past their age, describing them as 'seasoned robbers' at the time of the crime.
Judge David De Pas acknowledged the seriousness of the offense but issued more lenient sentences than prosecutors had requested. 'The sentences are quite lenient; I understand that you understand that you have caused harm,' he said during the verdict. 'The state of health of the main protagonists ethically prohibits incarcerating anyone... It would have been unjust to take you to prison this evening.'
Earlier this month, Kardashian testified that she had received an apology letter from Khedache. 'I do appreciate the letter for sure. I do appreciate it, I forgive you,' she told the court.
In her testimony, Kardashian recalled being terrified during the ordeal. Two masked men forced their way into her suite, dragged her out of bed, and tied her up. At one point, she feared she would be raped or killed. 'Please translate to them that I have babies, I have to make it home,' she recalled telling the hotel concierge.
After the intruders fled, Kardashian freed herself with the help of her friend and stylist, Simone Harouche, and managed to call for help. She said she remained fearful even when police arrived, uncertain whether she could trust them, given that the robbers had impersonated law enforcement.
Her legal team later released a statement saying Kardashian 'looks forward to putting this tragic episode behind her, as she continues working to improve the criminal justice system on behalf of victims, the innocent and the incarcerated seeking to redeem themselves.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Roya News
a day ago
- Roya News
Vanuatu considers stripping Andrew Tate of golden passport
Vanuatu's government is reviewing the citizenship status of influencer Andrew Tate after revelations surfaced that he secured a 'golden passport' from the Pacific island nation just as he was being arrested in Romania on serious criminal charges. Tate, a controversial online figure known for his self-declared misogyny and luxurious lifestyle, was granted Vanuatu citizenship in December 2022 under a fast-track program for foreign investors. At the time, he and his brother Tristan were taken into custody in Romania on accusations of rape and human trafficking—allegations they continue to deny. The passport program, which allows individuals to acquire Vanuatu nationality by investing at least USD 130,000 in the country, has drawn scrutiny for its security vulnerabilities. In late 2024, the European Union revoked Vanuatu's visa-free travel privileges, citing concerns that the scheme could be exploited by individuals with criminal backgrounds. A Vanuatu government spokesperson confirmed the matter is under active review. 'Once we have the files, definitely, the processes will be in place to revoke his citizenship,' said Kiery Manassah, speaking to ABC News. 'The government does not want to encourage people of questionable backgrounds to be granted citizenship,' he added. 'Those who are wanted by their countries or who are investigated by police authorities from overseas are not welcome to be part of the citizens of Vanuatu.' An investigation by the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) revealed the timing of Tate's citizenship application coincided with his arrest, raising concerns about how such programs are monitored. 'It's caused a lot of alarm because it's one of those loopholes that allows people to get a new passport or even a new identity and be able to evade law enforcement,' said Aubrey Belford, Pacific lead editor at OCCRP. Vanuatu, which does not have an extradition treaty with Romania, issued the passport to Tate in the same month he was detained in Europe. It remains unclear whether Tristan Tate also obtained citizenship through the same route. Beyond his legal issues, Andrew Tate has amassed millions of followers online by flaunting wealth and espousing toxic ideologies, particularly targeting women. His digital influence has alarmed educators and government bodies, including those in the UK, for encouraging misogynistic attitudes among boys and young men. Both brothers were born in the US and raised in the UK, where authorities are now pursuing their extradition on separate charges filed in 2024, including rape, human trafficking, and assault related to incidents from 2012 to 2015. Their legal team has said they will face the UK charges once the Romanian judicial process concludes. A Romanian court has ruled that extradition to the UK may proceed following any trial there.
Roya News
2 days ago
- Roya News
Man convicted for Quran burning outside Turkish consulate in London
A 50-year-old man has been convicted of a religiously aggravated offence after burning a copy of the Quran in front of the Turkish consulate in London earlier this year. Hamit Coskun, who traveled from Derby to Knightsbridge, set fire to the Islamic holy book while making offensive remarks about Islam on February 13. The act, which took place outside the consulate on Rutland Gardens, was deemed both inflammatory and hostile by Westminster Magistrates Court. District Judge John McGarva found Coskun guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence as well as disorderly behaviour, handing down a 240 pound (USD 324) fine and imposing an additional statutory surcharge of 96 pounds (USD 130). In court, Judge McGarva criticized the nature of Coskun's actions, describing them as 'provocative and taunting,' and stated, 'You have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers.' The judge said Coskun's motivations were rooted in personal and familial experiences in Turkey, adding, 'It's not possible to separate your views about the religion from your views about the followers.' He further noted, 'Your actions in burning the Quran where you did were highly provocative, and your actions were accompanied by bad language… motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.' Coskun, who is of Kurdish and Armenian descent, had argued that his protest was aimed solely at the Turkish government, particularly President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom he accused of turning Turkey into a haven for "radical Islamists". Prosecutors cited social media posts where Coskun denounced Erdogan's government and voiced concern about alleged moves toward establishing a 'Sharia regime.' Following his conviction, Coskun issued a statement calling the ruling 'an assault on free speech' and warning that it could discourage others from exercising their rights to protest. His legal defense has received backing from both the National Secular Society and the Free Speech Union (FSU), who have vowed to challenge the verdict through every legal channel. An FSU spokesperson said the organization is prepared to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights if necessary, arguing, 'Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn't require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers.' The case has also drawn attention from political figures. Equalities Minister and Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch took to X, stating, 'De facto blasphemy laws will set this country on the road to ruin. Freedom of belief, and freedom not to believe, are inalienable rights in Britain.' While a spokesperson for the prime minister refrained from commenting on the specific case, they reaffirmed that 'there are no blasphemy laws and no plans to introduce any.' Judge McGarva emphasized in his ruling that the conviction was not an attempt to revive blasphemy laws, which were officially abolished in 2008. He acknowledged that burning a religious book is not inherently unlawful but said the combination of Islamophobic remarks and inflammatory conduct rendered Coskun's actions criminal in this instance. Humanists UK also weighed in, expressing concern about the legal threshold for such prosecutions. A spokesperson stated, 'We must make sure that public order legislation is not used to disproportionately target speech – even offensive speech – on religious matters, thereby chilling legitimate criticism and expression.'
Roya News
3 days ago
- Roya News
US judge cancels planned Boeing trial over 737 crashes
A US federal judge on Monday cancelled the planned trial of US aviation giant Boeing over crashes of its 737 MAX aircraft that left nearly 350 people dead. The trial had been scheduled to begin June 23, but the Justice Department and Boeing reached a preliminary agreement last month to settle the long-running criminal probe into the accidents. US District Judge Reed O'Connor granted the request of both parties to vacate the trial date and cancelled the criminal trial which had been scheduled to be held in Fort Worth, Texas. But the judge still must give his final approval to the settlement and he could reschedule a trial if he fails to give the deal his green light. Under the agreement, which has drawn condemnation from some families of crash victims, Boeing will pay USD 1.1 billion and the Justice Department will dismiss a criminal charge over the company's conduct in the certification of the MAX. The agreement resolves the case without requiring Boeing to plead guilty to fraud in the certification of the MAX, which was involved in two crashes in 2018 and 2019 that claimed 346 lives – a Lion Air plane and an Ethiopian Airlines aircraft. The Justice Department described it as "a fair and just resolution that serves the public interest." "The Agreement guarantees further accountability and substantial benefits from Boeing immediately, while avoiding the uncertainty and litigation risk presented by proceeding to trial," it said. Family members of some MAX victims slammed the proposed settlement, however, as a giveaway to Boeing. "This kind of non-prosecution deal is unprecedented and obviously wrong for the deadliest corporate crime in US history," Paul Cassell, an attorney representing relatives of victims, said when the settlement was announced. The Justice Department cited other family members who expressed a desire for closure, quoting one who said "the grief resurfaces every time this case is discussed in court or other forums." The preliminary agreement was the latest development in a marathon case that came in the wake of crashes that tarnished Boeing's reputation and contributed to leadership shakeups at the aviation giant. 'Conspiracy to defraud' The case dates to a January 2021 Justice Department agreement with Boeing that settled charges that the company knowingly defrauded the Federal Aviation Administration during the MAX certification. The 2021 accord included a three-year probation period. But in May 2024, the Justice Department determined that Boeing had violated the 2021 accord following a number of subsequent safety lapses. Boeing agreed in July 2024 to plead guilty to "conspiracy to defraud the United States." But in December, Judge O'Connor rejected a settlement codifying the guilty plea, setting the stage for the incoming Trump administration to decide the next steps. The deal announced in May requires Boeing to pay a fine of USd 487.2 million with credit for a USD 243 million penalty the company paid previously under the January 2021 agreement.
