A French judge in the trial of dozens of men accused of raping an unconscious woman whose now former husband had repeatedly drugged her so that he and others could assault her decided on Friday to allow the public to see some of the video recordings of the alleged rapes.

The decision by Judge Roger Arata in Avignon, in southern France, to allow journalists and members of the public attending the trial to see the recordings marks a stunning reversal in a case that has shaken France.

It comes after a two-week legal battle in which journalists following the trial and lawyers of Gisèle Pelicot — who was allegedly raped over the course of a decade — argued that the videos were crucial for a full understanding of the extraordinary trial.

Pelicot, 71, has become a symbol of the fight against sexual violence in France. She has insisted that the trial be public, against the court’s suggestion that it be held behind closed doors.

Since the hearings started on Sept. 2, Pelicot has come face-to-face almost daily with her ex-husband, Dominique Pelicot, and 49 other alleged rapists. She has been praised for her courage and composure, admired for speaking in a calm and clear voice, and allowing that her full name be published —uncommon under French law for victims in rape trials.

Her insistence that the videos, recorded by her ex-husband and submitted as evidence in the trial —in which men can be seen sexually abusing her apparently inert body— be shown to the public speak to her wish that trial serve as a national example, one of her lawyers told The Associated Press.

“It’s a unique case: we don’t have one representation of rape. We have dozens, hundreds of videos of a rape,” said the attorney, Stéphane Babonneau. “Gisèle Pelicot thinks that this shock wave is necessary, so that no one can say after this: ‘I didn’t know this was rape’.”

The explicit videos shown during the trial, which has underscored the difficulties that sexual violence victims can face in France, are especially important, Pelicot’s lawyers say, since the vast majority of the defendants deny the allegations of rape.

Some defendants claim Pelicot’s husband tricked them, others say he forced them to have sexual intercourse with her and that they were terrified. Still others argue they believed she was consenting or that her husband’s consent was sufficient.

The videos, the lawyers say, speak for themselves.

With Friday’s decision, Arata reversed his earlier Sept. 20 ruling that the videos would be shown only on a case-by-case basis, and behind closed doors. At the time, he had argued that they undermined the “dignity” of the hearings.

A day later, France’s Judicial Press Association filed a request against the decision, backed by Pelicot’s lawyers.

Until now, each time a video was shown, journalists and members of the public had to leave the courtroom.

Jean-Philippe Deniau, a journalist who covers the judiciary for France Inter Radio and who has followed the trial, says the videos are essential to the people’s understanding of the case.

They would be no more disturbing that some of the evidence he has seen in the past, he said. “When we work on trials about terrorist attacks, crimes, murders … there are always difficult moments,” Deniau said.

As an example, he mentioned hearing several defendants earlier this week testify they had come to the Pelicots’ house in Provence to have consensual sexual intercourse, and that they were taking part in a “game” to see if they could get Gisèle Pelicot to wake up.

Deniau said that following the ruling on Friday, the court was later in the day shown one four-minute recording from the collection of videos. In his opinion, Deniau said the video appeared to counter claims by the defendants of a consensual “game.”

Washington — A joint intelligence bulletin issued by the Department of Homeland Security and FBI warned of the potential for domestic violent extremists “with election-related grievances” to target political candidates and elected officials in the coming weeks.

The bulletin, which CBS News obtained, is dated Oct. 3 and says domestic extremists “pose a threat of violence to a range of targets directly and indirectly associated with elections through at least the presidential inauguration” on Jan. 20, 2025. 

Election workers, judicial personnel involved in election-related court cases, members of the media, political party representatives and perceived political opponents are also potential targets. Publicly accessible venues, including voting locations and campaign events, also make “attractive targets,” the bulletin says, noting the attempted assassination against former President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13. 

It also refers to the second assassination attempt against the Republican presidential nominee at his private golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Sept. 15, saying that “threat actors may seek to target individuals at their private residences or other non-public locations.”

Domestic extremists “could seek to use a range of violent or disruptive tactics against these targets, including but not limited to physical attacks, threats of violence, swatting and doxing, mailing or otherwise delivering suspicious items, arson, and other means of property destruction,” according to the bulletin. 

There have already been a number of election-related threats during the 2024 campaign, including letters containing white powder sent to election officials, fake bomb threats to state capitol buildings and “swatting” calls, in which a caller makes a false crime report intended to draw law enforcement to people’s homes.

“In many of these incidents, the perpetrators and their motives remain under investigation, but their actions likely are intended to instill fear and disrupt election operations,” the bulletin says.

The bulletin also notes there has been an increase in threats to election workers in recent months which tends “to correlate with jurisdictions where results are contested via recounts, audits, or public election disputes.” 

A senior DHS official told CBS News on Wednesday that there are concerns that election workers will be targeted on Election Day “to try to derail the process that those workers have a hand in overseeing.”

Domestic extremists aren’t the only threat to the democratic process. Federal law enforcement officials have long warned about foreign election interference from Russia, China and Iran.

Nation states have become “increasingly sophisticated” and more effective at using new technologies such as artificial intelligence to “broaden the scope and scale of those efforts,” the DHS official said. 

Matthew Olsen, who leads the Justice Department’s National Security Division, recently told CBS News that Russia, Iran and China “are looking at ways at which they can change the outcome of our election, or to find issues that divide us in ways that support their national interests at the expense of ours.”