The testimony of the 19-year-old British woman, who is being tried before the Famagusta District Court, was not taken under pressure or inappropriate conditions, the District Judge of the Court, Michalis Papathanassiou, ruled, announcing his decision for the trial in the public court. Democracy from the 19-year-old accused of falsely reporting gang rape by 12 Israelis.
Rejecting the claim of the defendant's lawyers that her testimony on July 28 was a product of pressure from the Cypriot police, the judge ruled that this was unsubstantiated.
As she said, taking into account the confusion observed in her testimony in general, something that can be confirmed by a simple reading of the minutes, she said, "the version of the accused remains virtually baseless or unconvincing and can not be accepted."
At the same time, he said that it is clear that the background of the testimony of the defense witnesses is essentially checked as problematic.
For the defense witness, Dr. Christine Tizzard, the judge said that the witness's report of a traumatic event as a result of a horse accident could not be accepted. He also said that the fact that the witness took for granted what the accused told her, without having to dispute it, is clear that "it implies a problematic background for her diagnosis".
For the report she prepared, she said, her testimony was made essentially only to help the accused… "noting that" with all due respect ", she tries indirectly but clearly to serve the version of the accused, giving way to" escape "to the accused in relation to what she says in her testimony. The judge said that this is not what an expert who has a duty to present his independent opinion objectively and impartially should do.
For witness Andrea Nini, Criminologist and Forensic Linguist, Professor of Linguistics and English at the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom, who was asked by the defendant's lawyers to answer the question whether the recall of the 19-year-old He said that his report on the lack of comparative data "shows the ambiguity of his version".
Regarding the Prosecution's witnesses, Judge Papathanassiou said that Sergeant Marios Christou, head of the investigation into the alleged rape of the accused, explained in detail how the decision was made to interrogate the accused and did not find anything in his testimony that casts a shadow over his actions as an investigator in the case or how he obtained that testimony.
In general, the prosecution's witnesses, the judge said, "were consistent and presented a comprehensive, consistent, consistent and convincing version of the facts regarding the conditions for obtaining the supplementary testimony" of the British woman, firstly and secondly, of the disputed testimony with the positions. of these witnesses to remain steadfast to the end.
For the accused, he said, "her version is characterized by contradictions, confusion, lack of logic and coherence and exaggerations to the extent that it can not convince her." She also said that her version does not show stability and consistency, not even in relation to the positions presented to the prosecution witnesses.
She added that some of the substantive positions that she presented during her testimony were never submitted to the prosecution witnesses to comment on them and for this reason these positions can not be accepted anyway, while in general her version is considered unreliable precisely due to non-projection. clear positions from the outset before the Court.
The case continues on Friday at 11 am.