"Bataclan, I shot it for free": rapper BORO700, whose song was chanted during a high-school blockade, will stand trial for glorifying terrorism

What happened at the high-school blockade, and how did BORO700’s song become part of the case?

During a blockade outside their high school in Beaugency, three teenagers sang rap in front of the school. One of the songs they chanted was associated with rapper BORO700. That public setting matters because the words were heard beyond a private conversation.

The song became part of the case because French prosecutors are pursuing the teenagers for public apology of terrorist acts. The issue is not simply that they listened to rap. Investigators and prosecutors are examining the words they repeated, the reference to the Bataclan, and the circumstances of the performance.

The teenagers are appearing before a juvenile judge. BORO700 is also facing a separate prosecution for alleged terrorism apology. The cases show how lyrics can move from artistic expression into a legal dispute when they are publicly repeated and appear to praise or endorse terrorist violence.

Who is BORO700, and what words or references in his song are at the center of the prosecution?

BORO700 is identified in the source as a rapper. He is being prosecuted because one of his songs is alleged to amount to apology of terrorism. The case focuses on the words and references in that song, rather than on his professional label alone.

The most striking phrase is “Bataclan, je l’ai shooté à l’œil,” quoted in the headline. It refers to the Bataclan and uses language associated with shooting. The song was later chanted by students during a blockade, connecting the rapper’s lyrics to a separate prosecution involving three minors.

A court must determine whether the wording presents terrorist violence as something to praise, celebrate, or support. A provocative lyric is not automatically criminal. Its meaning, context, and public use matter. BORO700 will therefore be judged on whether the song crossed the legal boundary into public glorification of terrorism.

How many teenagers are being prosecuted, and what does it mean that they are minors appearing before a juvenile judge?

The source identifies three teenagers, described as three minors, who are being prosecuted for public apology of terrorist acts. They sang rap outside their high school in Beaugency during a blockade. Their age changes the legal setting, but it does not prevent prosecution for alleged serious speech offenses.

Appearing before a juvenile judge means the case is handled within France’s youth justice system. That system considers the defendant’s age and maturity, alongside the alleged conduct. It can combine accountability with educational aims and special protections for minors. The judge must decide whether the words publicly repeated by the teenagers meet the legal definition of terrorism apology.

The precise outcome is not given in the source. The proceedings show that minors can still face judicial scrutiny when public speech is alleged to praise terrorist acts. The judge will assess the words, the performance, and the surrounding circumstances before deciding what responsibility follows.

What is “public glorification of terrorism” under French law?

Public glorification of terrorism, commonly called “apologie du terrorisme” in France, is a criminal speech offense. It concerns publicly presenting terrorist acts as admirable, justified, or worthy of approval. The law targets support for the acts, not merely discussion of terrorism or mention of an attack.

A lyric, chant, post, or speech can become relevant when an audience can access it and its wording appears to praise terrorist violence. In this case, prosecutors are examining a BORO700 song and its public repetition by students during a school blockade. The reference to the Bataclan is part of that examination.

The charge does not mean guilt has already been established. A court must interpret the words in context and decide whether they truly glorify terrorist acts. Artistic style, provocation, and controversial subject matter do not automatically settle the question. The legal issue is whether the public expression crossed into praise or approval.

What happened at the Bataclan, and why is mentioning it in a song especially significant in France?

The Bataclan attack occurred in Paris on 13 November 2015, during coordinated terrorist attacks. Gunmen attacked people attending a concert at the venue, killing 90 people. The event became a defining national trauma and remains closely associated with terrorism in France.

That history gives the phrase “Bataclan, je l’ai shooté à l’œil” unusual weight. It does not merely name a place. It invokes a venue linked to mass violence and uses a shooting reference. Prosecutors can therefore examine whether the wording treats the attack or terrorist violence as something positive, rather than simply referring to a historical event.

Mentioning the Bataclan is not automatically illegal. Artists, journalists, and citizens may discuss attacks, even in difficult or provocative language. The significance here comes from the combination of the reference, the words used, and the alleged public glorification. The court must decide what the lyric communicates in context.

What legal consequences could BORO700 and the teenagers face if a court finds their words amounted to glorifying terrorism?

If a court finds that the words amounted to public apology of terrorism, the speaker can receive a criminal conviction. Under French law, the ordinary maximum penalty is five years in prison and a €75,000 fine. When the offense is committed through an online communication service, the maximum can rise to seven years and €100,000.

Those figures are legal ceilings, not automatic sentences. A court considers the precise words, their audience, the way they were distributed, and the defendant’s circumstances. BORO700’s case concerns the song itself. The teenagers’ case concerns their public chanting of rap during the Beaugency blockade.

The three teenagers are minors, so their cases go before a juvenile judge and follow youth justice rules. That can affect both procedure and punishment. The source does not state the sentences sought or any verdict. Each case still depends on a court finding that the expression legally praised or supported terrorist acts.

How does French law distinguish protected artistic or political expression from speech that publicly supports or praises terrorist acts?

French law does not ban every mention of terrorism or every controversial artistic work. A song may discuss violence, criticize institutions, or use shock value without being criminal. Political speech and artistic expression receive protection, especially when their meaning is clearly critical, fictional, or descriptive.

The boundary is public support or praise for terrorist acts. Courts examine the actual words, their overall meaning, the setting, the audience, and how the message was shared. A performance in public can be assessed differently from a private exchange. In this case, prosecutors are examining a BORO700 lyric and students chanting it during a school blockade.

Calling something a song does not provide automatic immunity. Conversely, a disturbing reference does not automatically prove an offense. The court must decide whether the expression merely invokes or discusses terrorism, or instead presents terrorist violence as admirable or justified. That decision protects debate while addressing speech that publicly glorifies terror.

Key Facts:

📌 Three minors sang rap during a high-school blockade in Beaugency.

📌 A BORO700 song was chanted during the blockade.

📌 The teenagers face prosecution for public terrorism apology.

📌 BORO700 is identified as a rapper.

📌 His song references the Bataclan and shooting.

📌 He will be judged for alleged terrorism apology.

📌 Three minors are being prosecuted.