In Sevran, Corinne Narassiguin free after shooting during an immersion with the LAC

Socialist Senator Corinne Narassiguin was caught in a shooting in Sevran on Tuesday evening, October 13, 2026, while she was participating in an immersion with anti-crime brigade (LAC) police officers. The elected of Seine-Saint-Denis and the agents are unharmed. A person on the public road was slightly injured, according to a police source quoted by France Télévisions. The news, revealed by Le Parisien, is also reported by Le Figaro and several other media. [S1] [S4] [S5] [S6]

Shots around the police vehicle

The events took place around 10:15 p.m., Yuri-Gagarine Avenue, in the Beaudottes district. The Parisien places the first detonations at the moment when the LAC vehicle enters this avenue. Le Figaro describes a crew arriving near the station, whose members explained to the parliamentarian the difficulties of the area. Both accounts agree on a first confusion: the police first thought to hear fireworks mortars. [S5] [S6]

The exact number of detonations remains to be considered with caution. Fdesouche and the Latest News of Alsace report an estimate of fifteen to twenty. The police testimony published by Le Figaro describes instead a first series of about five detonations, a pause, and a second series of about twenty. These accounts describe the same episode, but do not allow a precise count of the shots. [S2] [S4] [S6]

According to Alsace's Latest News, the police officers came out of the vehicle while the senator was still on the back seat. Subsequently, reinforcements intervened. A bullet impact was observed on a door of the LAC vehicle; Fdesouche specifies that it was the rear right door. These elements attest to the crew's exposure, without establishing who was being targeted. [S2] [S4]

Lightly injured and exposed passersby

The balance sheet reported by franceinfo clearly distinguishes the occupants of the vehicle, unharmed, from the person slightly injured on the public road. His identity, the specific circumstances of his injury and his possible care are not detailed in this article. It would therefore be premature to further clarify his situation. [S1]

The presence of the parliamentarian does not summarize the risks incurred that night. In a testimony at the Figaro taken by the Last News of Alsace, a policeman evokes twenty to thirty civilians present in the vicinity of the station. He explained that he had sought to protect both a colleague whom he feared was injured, the senator and those present. This is part of his testimony, not an independent census. The published report finally indicates that no police officers were injured. [S4]

A found weapon, responsibilities still to be established

Franceinfo confirms the seizure of a firearm. Fdesouche et les Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace speak of a gun-trailer found after the shooting, the first placing its discovery in the common parts of a building. The information consulted does not indicate whether an examination established that the weapon was used during the shooting. [S1] [S2] [S4]

An investigation was opened by the Bobigny Public Prosecutor's Office, according to the Latest News of Alsace. No inquiries were reported at the time of the publications consulted. The identity of the shooters, their number, their motive and the target of the shots are not established in these accounts. The presence of drug trafficking in the sector, reported in particular by the police source of franceinfo, is not sufficient to demonstrate the motive of this specific episode, nor a desire to target the senator. [S1] [S2] [S4]

The publications thus converge on the place, the presence of Corinne Narassiguin with LAC and the immediate human balance. They do not, however, constitute as many independent investigations: several repeat the revelation of the Parisian, and the texts provided by L-Est Republican and the Last News of Alsace are largely identical. Franceinfo provides a confirmation attributed to a police source from France Télévisions, while Le Figaro publishes an agent's account. This distinction is used to separate corroborated facts from details still dependent on testimony. [S1] [S2] [S3] [S4] [S5] [S6]