The French president, Emmanuel Macron, and his wife plan to present scientific evidence in a court case to prove that Brigitte Macron was not born male, the lawyer representing the couple said on Sept. 18.
The Macrons filed a lawsuit in July against the high-profile conservative influencer Candace Owens, alleging that she repeatedly made defamatory attacks against them, which they say were done for financial gain.
Owens, who has 7.2 million followers on X, said last year she would “stake [her] entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man,” who was born Jean-Michel Trogneux—a claim first made by bloggers in France.
The Macrons’ lawyer, Tom Clare, of the law firm Clare Locke, which has won several high-profile defamation cases, told the BBC’s “Fame Under Fire” podcast that evidence that the first lady was born a woman exists, but they have declined to share it with Owens and other journalists who have asked for it.
“We’re prepared to demonstrate fully, both generically and specifically, that what she’s saying about Brigitte Macron is false,” Clare said.
‘Incredibly Upsetting’
The couple’s attorney said, “It is incredibly upsetting to think that you have to go and subject yourself to put this type of proof forward.
“It is a process that she will have to subject herself to in a very public way. But she’s willing to do it. She is firmly resolved to do what it takes to set the record straight.”
When asked whether the Macrons planned to supply pictures of Brigitte Macron pregnant and raising her three children, Clare said that such photographs existed and would be presented in court.
The Vermont-based lawyer said, “Expert testimony will come out that will be scientific in nature.”
Clare did not elaborate on the nature of this planned testimony, but said the couple were prepared to demonstrate fully, “both generically and specifically,” that the claims of transgenderism were untrue.
Owens, who began her own hit podcast after parting company with the Daily Wire, made an eight-part series entitled “Becoming Brigitte” in which she discusses her theories about the first lady.

Former Teacher
The biographical account of how the Macrons met in the early 1990s is that she was his teacher at a Jesuit school in Amiens.
Emmanuel Macron, now 47, was 15 when he met his then 39-year-old future spouse in a drama class, according to writer Anne Fulda, who penned the book “Emmanuel Macron: A Perfect Young Man.”
Brigitte Macron, now 72, has said that she and the young Emmanuel did not become a couple until some years after he left school.
When the pair met, Brigitte Macron was married to a banker, Andre-Louis Auziere, with whom she had her three children.
The Macrons filed a suit in July alleging that Owens had made continued defamatory attacks against the couple in order to “promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money.”
The suit also states that Trogneux is Brigitte Macron’s older brother, who lives in northern France and attended both of Emmanuel Macron’s presidential inaugurations in 2017 and 2022.
It also accuses the podcaster of alleging that Macron and his wife are blood relatives—she has claimed they are uncle and nephew—and that the president was installed into office through a U.S. Central Intelligence Agency plot.

Claims Began in France
Such claims about the first lady first went viral on social media in 2021 and reached a worldwide audience through a YouTube video made by the French self-styled investigative journalist, Natacha Rey, who conducted a three-hour interview with Amandine Roy, a self-described spiritual medium.
The Macrons won a defamation lawsuit in France against Roy and Rey, but this was overturned after an appeals court ruled it did not meet the legal threshold for defamation.
While the judge said their theory was wrong, there was no malicious intent, as they believed their claims to be true.
In their lawsuit against Owens, who lives in Tennessee with her British husband George Farmer and their four children, the Macrons say she “disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favour of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers.”
The Epoch Times contacted the Clare Locke law firm for comment, but none had been received at the time of publication.






















