constitute the offence of wilful destruction of property, provided for and punished by article 622-l of the Penal Code; that she suffered personally and directly from these acts which she denounced to the State Counsel of Faso at the High Court of Kongoussi and from which they were summoned, for them to be sentenced to the penalties provided for by law; that she suffered both material and financial damage; that her material damage amounts to CFAF seventy-three thousand five hundred and eighty (73,580) and that the financial damage amounts to CFAF seven hundred and fifty thousand (750,000); that in fact the ransacked equipment was used for her fish business; that since the perpetration of the acts mentioned above, she no longer carries out the said activity, whereas she made a daily profit of between CFAF fifteen thousand (15,000) and CFAF twenty thousand (20,000; that she also hired the services of a counsel whose fees amount to CFAF five hundred thousand (500,000); that she is a plaintiff seeking that the above-mentioned be jointly and severally sentenced by this court to the payment of the sum of CFAF eight hundred and twenty-three thousand five hundred eighty (823,580, as well as to the payment of expenses not included in the costs; Appearing this 06/03/2019 at the bar, O. M. M, O. K and S. S rejected the charges against them; O. M. M stated that it is customary for the women of the neighbourhood to question each other when one of them is at fault; that it was in these circumstances that they went to the home of the plaintiff the day following the assault and battery of the boy so as to question her about her attitude; She stated that there were many of them, about a hundred; that they did not go to her home with the intention of hitting her; that having refused to engage in dialogue, they went to the Kongoussi territorial brigade to denounce her behaviour; that it was on their return from the brigade that they noticed that the plaintiff's equipment had been ransacked, that it was the children who were among the crowd who ransacked the said equipment; consequently, they do not identify themselves with the acts of ransacking of property for which they are being blamed; OUEDRAOGA Kalizeta declared that the civil party was threatening S.S on the grounds that she had taken the child to the hospital; that it was in this sense that they mobilized to go to her home to question her about her behaviour; that she did not acknowledge the acts of which she was accused; that she asked the plaintiff to produce proof of their guilt;