Mother in Bobigny Called “Psychological Bobo” – Investigation Launched

Bobigny – 22.06.2026: A verdict at the Bobigny court has sparked a wave of outrage. In the case of a mother who reported sexual harassment of her seven-year-old son, she was labeled a “psychological Bobo” in the reasoning of the verdict. This derogatory judgment provoked harsh criticism, including from the French Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin. He condemned the act as “extremely serious and unethical” and ordered an investigation to propose possible disciplinary measures to the High Council of the Judiciary (Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature, CSM).

The mother, a psychologist herself, had sent her son to therapy after the child reported sexual assaults by his babysitter. Despite an acquittal of the babysitter because the child’s testimony was deemed insufficiently specific, the judges confirmed that they believed the child. However, in the written reasoning of the verdict, the mother was criticized: she was said to have “overreacted” and led her son into a “delusion of victimization by sexual violence.”

This formulation caused particular outrage. The family’s lawyer reported that he only received the reasoning eight months after the trial and was shocked by the “absurd and almost insulting tone.” He described the wording as “completely unimaginable” and demanded a review of the verdict.

The president of the Bobigny court, Anne Auclair-Rabinovitch, also expressed dismay at the events. She called the incident “unbearable” and announced that disciplinary as well as organizational measures would be initiated against those responsible. The justice authority wants to ensure that such ethically questionable statements are not tolerated in judicial rulings.

Justice Minister Darmanin pointed out that plaintiffs, civil parties, and especially victims deserve the full respect of the judicial system. The ongoing investigation aims to provide clarity and help maintain public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. The results are expected as soon as next Monday.

The case has triggered a broad debate about the treatment of victims of sexual violence and the judiciary’s responsibility to handle such sensitive cases with the necessary care and respect. Many voices are now calling for increased sensitivity among judges and better protection for victims, also against possible prejudices within the judiciary.

The affair illustrates how difficult and emotionally taxing trials involving sexual assault can be, and how important it is for the judiciary to act professionally and respectfully in order not to jeopardize public trust in state institutions.