Achraf Hakimi, the 27-year-old right-back for Paris Saint-Germain, has been the subject of a rape investigation since late 2023 following a report filed by a 23-year-old woman (at the time of the alleged incident) with the police. On Tuesday, it was announced that Hakimi will stand trial in this case. This has sparked outrage from his lawyer. Rachel-Flore Pardo, the lawyer for the woman accusing the Moroccan international, reacted strongly to the news on RMC Sport.
“We don’t have much to gain.”
“I will not allow Achraf Hakimi’s defense to denigrate, slander, and insult my client. Among the messages in the file are these: ‘Please, hurry, he raped me.’ That’s what my client said, those are her words. Achraf Hakimi’s defense is relentlessly claiming that my client is attempting extortion in this case, that she’s mercenary, that she wants money. There’s little point in taking legal action for rape to obtain money. We don’t have much to gain; that’s a fact, and it applies to all rape victims in France.”
There is nothing in the file, not a shred of evidence, to suggest any attempt at blackmail or extortion by my client. Let’s be very clear. I’m not the only one saying this. The public prosecutor and the investigating judge have also been convinced. So, enough with the slander, enough with the lies.
“That’s completely false.”
Enough with these false claims being spread everywhere. It’s not true. Contrary to what Achraf Hakimi’s defense team is saying, my client fully cooperated with the investigation. Achraf Hakimi’s defense team claims that my client obstructed all investigative steps. That’s completely false. My client went to the police station that very day. When she appeared before the investigators, she said she was not ready yet and that she would think about it, but she wanted to come forward immediately because she felt that even a football player did not have the right to abuse her. And I feel it’s time people accepted that.
As always with a case like this, we can only be very cautious while awaiting the court’s decision. We don’t have all the facts, and what we do have is contradictory from one side to the other. It’s difficult to see clearly, especially since everyone is logically defending their position and version of events. It’s not a question of declaring Hakimi guilty before the trial, nor of exonerating him. That’s not our place, nor anyone else’s, outside of this case.
It would even be better if public statements ceased. They don’t advance the legal process and don’t provide any information since the two sides disagree. The wisest course of action is to wait and let justice take its course.
