Cour d’Appel de Paris

Name: Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2
Author: Cour d’Appel de Paris

Summary

“Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2”, is a work by Cour d’Appel de Paris. It explores elements such as Charles ENDERLIN, Philippe KARSENTY and cameraman.

Quotes from Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2 (Cour d’Appel de Paris)

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ On October 2, FRANCE 2 specifies that a scene showing "unacceptable", circulated with the comment by Charles ENDERLIN, was filmed by his cameraman and sound taker, Talal Abu RAHMA, who was present in the studio, and said that he is "sure the fire came from the Israeli side"; On 27 November, France 2 relates to the information given by Charles ENDERLIN on the air, that the military investigation led by General SAMIA responsible for security in southern zone concluded that it was "more probable that the child has been killed by Palestinians than by Israelis" ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ Mohamed died and his father is seriously injured. A Palestinian policeman and an ambulance man have also lost their lives during this battle." October 1, France 2 comes back on these events with the voice of Charles ENDERLIN who speaks of "Mohamed, a twelve years old child, of whom Talal ABU RAHMA, FRANCE 2 correspondent in Gaza, has filmed the tragic death" and announced the publication of a press release of the Israeli army "regreting the loss of life and affirming that it is not possible to determine the origin of fire". ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ Considering, on the prudence of expression, it is worth noting that the limits of acceptable criticism are even bigger than the subject is public interest and charges on a beam supported elements of investigation, and even wider to those who, by their function or activity, exposed to the public ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ But considering that only recalled the first judges to produce the effect absolutoire provided by Article 35 of the Act of 29 July 1881, proved the truth of defamatory facts must be perfect, complete and the correlative imputations defamatory in their materiality and their scope ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ DECISION Considering that, on complaints with civil party constitution of the National Television Company FRANCE 2 and Charles ENDERLIN, the magistrate referred Philippe KARSENTY before the Correctional Tribunal of Paris to meet the offence of public defamation against a person due to several passages in a press release dated 22 November 2004 and an article published online on November 26, 2004 on the site www.MR.fr by the company MEDIA RATINGS entitled France 2: Arlette CHABOT and Charles ENDERLIN must be removed from office immediately ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ Both journalists declare unambiguously have entrusted Arlette CHABOT their "serious doubts", but be "ready to dismiss accusations of ROSENZWEIG on the staging of the death of the child if the viewing of all rushes shot by Talal ABU RAHMA confirms what Charles ENDERLIN said at least two occasions, including to Télérama: "I cut the agony of the child. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ Considering that personal animosity towards the civil parties is not demonstrated by the production of two certificates, one of René BACKMANN, the other of François RAIGA CLEMENCEAU, after an investigation by Philippe KARSENTY, while the content of the article and release the director of the rating agency media does its part, no personal feeling hostile towards Charles ENDERLIN and FRANCE 2 ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ Charles ENDERLIN comments on the images in following terms: "3 p.m. Everything just changed radically near the settlement of Netzarim in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians have fired live ammunition, the Israelis responded. Ambulance, journalists and simple bystanders are caught in the crossfire. Here, Jamal Mohamed and his son are under fire from Israeli positions. Mohammed was twelve years old, his father tries to protect it. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ The President, after asking the parties, the accused having had the last word, their views on the usefulness for the court to view itself rushes of the cameraman, announced that the Court put the matter under advisement and render stops at the hearing on October 3, 2007. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Cour d’Appel de Paris, Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2

“ They also note that, "in the minutes before the shooting, Palestinians seem to have organized a staging", [...] "play at war" with the Israelis and simulate, in most cases, imaginary injuries. "And that viewing full rushes also demonstrates that when Charles ENDERLIN announces the boy's death [...] nothing allows him to say that he is really dead and even less that he was killed by Israeli soldiers", whereas, according to them, FRANCE 2 journalists have provided during the presentation rushes that "their experts have even shown [...] ”

Cour d’Appel de Paris

Summary

Quotes from Karsenty v. Enderlin-France2 (Cour d’Appel de Paris)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature