The French President and His Wife to Present Medical Proof in US Court to Confirm Brigitte’s Gender, Legal Counsel Affirms
France’s leader together with Brigitte intend to offer expert and documented evidence in a US court to confirm that the first lady is biologically female, according to their attorney.
The couple brought a libel case in response to conservative influencer the online personality, who has repeatedly alleged that Brigitte was born male.
In response, her attorneys have moved to throw out the claim.
“This has been profoundly disturbing,” stated their attorney, noting that the allegations serve as a “burden” to the president.
The lawyer highlighted that medical documentation is planned to be introduced in court to refute the baseless allegations through a detailed manner.
“Mrs. Macron is absolutely determined to take all necessary steps to clear her name,” he added.
Inquired about whether photographs of Mrs. Macron during pregnancy could be used, their representative confirmed that relevant proof is available and can be shown following judicial procedures.
The commentator, boasting millions of supporters online, has consistently promoted the belief that the French first lady is male.
The allegations originally surfaced in conspiracy forums several years ago, attracting notoriety via posts from online figures.
Although the couple initially secured a libel ruling in France, it was thrown out on appeal due to constitutional rights, rather than the truth of the statements.
The couple currently seeking review of the outcome.
Regarding the American case, they contend that she intentionally discounted reliable proof and amplified known defamers.
US defamation law mandate that high-profile individuals demonstrate “knowing falsehood” by the person being sued.
“The case revolves around protecting our reputation!” Emmanuel Macron told a French publication. “These are nonsense, disseminated intending to creating distress.”
Owens’ legal team argue that the legal action cannot be heard in that jurisdiction, citing jurisdictional issues and potential operational burden.
The commentator has previously justified her statements, stating her conviction in First Amendment rights.
