Read the full article, 10 convicted of cyberbullying French first lady Brigitte Macron, on ABC News

According to the article, a Paris court recently found 10 people guilty of cyberbullying France's first lady, Brigitte Macron, by spreading false online claims about her gender and sexuality, including allegations she was born a man.

One defendant was sentenced to six months in prison, while eight were handed suspended sentences between two and eight months. All 10 were mandated to attend cyberbullying awareness training.

“Degrading, Insulting, and Malicious” Comments

The court pointed to "particularly degrading, insulting, and malicious" comments referring to false claims regarding alleged trans identity and alleged pedo criminality targeting Brigitte Macron. 

"Repeated publications have had cumulative harmful effects," the court said.

The Defendants

The defendants, eight men and two women aged 41 to 65, were accused of posting "numerous malicious comments" falsely claiming that President Emmanuel Macron 's wife was born a man and linking the 24-year age gap with her husband to pedophilia. Some of the posts were viewed tens of thousands of times.

Brigitte Macron’s Response

Brigitte Macron didn't attend the two-day trial in October. Speaking on TF1 national television recently, she said she launched legal proceedings to "set an example" in the fight against harassment.

Her lawyer, Jean Ennochi, said "what is important is that there are immediate cyberbullying awareness trainings, and for some of the defendants, a ban on using their social media accounts."

Her daughter, Tiphaine Auzière, testified about what she described as the "deterioration" of her mother's life since the online harassment intensified. "She cannot ignore the horrible things said about her," Auzière told the court. She said the impact has extended to the entire family, including Macron's grandchildren.

One of the defendants, a property asset manager, received a six-month prison sentence. Under French law, the sentence may be served at home, possibly while wearing an ankle monitor or following other requirements set by a judge.

Defendant Delphine Jegousse, 51, who is known as Amandine Roy and describes herself as a medium and author, is considered to have played a major role in spreading the rumor after she released a four-hour video on her YouTube channel in 2021. She was given a 6-month prison sentence.

The X account of Aurélien Poirson-Atlan, 41, known as Zoé Sagan on social media, was suspended in 2024 after his name was cited in several judicial investigations. Poirson-Atlan was given an 8-month prison sentence, along with another defendant, a gallery owner.

The one defendant not given a prison sentence was a teacher, who apologized during the trial. He will have to attend the cyberbullying awareness training.

Several will see their online access suspended for six months on the social media where they made their posts.

Sentences Proportional to Seriousness of Comments

The sentences were proportional to the seriousness of the comments, the court stressed.

French judicial authorities did not disclose the names of the defendants, but some made their names public by speaking out

Humor or Satire As a Defense

During the trial, several defendants told the court their comments were intended as humor or satire and said they did not understand why they were being prosecuted.

Years of Conspiracy Theories

The case follows years of conspiracy theories falsely alleging that Brigitte Macron was born under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux, which is actually the name of her brother. The Macrons have also filed a defamation suit in the United States against conservative influencer Candace Owens.

The Macrons

The Macrons, who have been married since 2007, first met at the high school where he was a student and she was a teacher. Brigitte Macron, 24 years her husband's senior, was then called Brigitte Auzière, a married mother of three.

Emmanuel Macron, 48, has been France's president since 2017.

Discussion Questions

  1. Define cyberbullying and defamation.

    Cyberbullying is bullying that takes place using digital technologies. It involves repeated or severe behavior intended to harass, threaten, embarrass, or harm someone through online or electronic communication.

    Defamation is a false statement presented as a fact that harms a person’s reputation. There are two types of defamation: (1) slander, which is a false oral statement; and (2) libel, which is a false written statement.

  2. As indicated in the article, during the trial, several defendants told the court their comments were intended as humor or satire and said they did not understand why they were being prosecuted. What role does humor or satire play in terms of defamation liability?

    Although humor or satire can be a defense to defamation liability, whether it protects the accused depends on how a reasonable person would understand the statement. If humor or satire makes it clear that no reasonable person would accept the statement as a literal fact, it is not defamation. 
    Based on your author’s review of the information presented in this article, the convictions of the 10 defendants were justified. A reasonable person might accept the defendants’ claims, particularly since it is not clear that the statements regarding French First Lady Brigitte Macron were intended as humor or satire.

  3. Refer to Teaching Tip 1, “Defamation (of Public Officials),” of this newsletter. If these cases had been tried in the United States, would the outcome likely have been the same, or would it have been different? Explain your response.

    In your author’s opinion, the outcome would likely have been the same had the cases been tried in the United States. 

    Let us assume that French First Lady Brigitte Macron meets the definition of a “public official” (Even though it is not an elected position, the “First Lady” of the president of France does serve in an official capacity, much like the “First Lady” of the president of the United States.). As established in the U.S. Supreme Court decision New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), the First Amendment “prohibits a public official from recovering damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with ‘actual malice'—that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” It seems patently evident in the cases involving Mrs. Macron that the defendants made their statements knowing that they were false.