Filenews 21 February 2023
With the speeches of the two sides, the defence lawyers and the representative of the Prosecutor's Office, the procedure of the trial in the case of conjugal murder in Tremithousa continued today, Tuesday, before the Permanent Assize Court sitting in Paphos. The Court, after hearing the speeches of both sides, reserved its decision for March 21, at 9:30 in the morning. He also ordered that the 74-year-old remain in custody.
During today's proceedings, the defence lawyers of the 74-year-old confessed marital killer, lawyers Ritsa Pekri and Nikoletta Charalambidou, said, among other things, that the Prosecution failed to prove beyond any doubt that the defendant's testimony and statements are the result of his free will.
According to the defence lawyers, their client's right to be informed from the outset that he was a suspect, his right to remain silent and to be provided with a translator was violated.
They also said the 74-year-old's statements were made in the absence of a lawyer and that his medical condition at the material time was not good at all, as he had consumed a quantity of drugs along with alcohol in an attempt to kill himself. The same was said about his mental and psychological state, as according to the forensic psychiatrist, the 74-year-old defendant at the material time suffered from depression and from the disorder of distancing from the events.
They also pointed out that their client's statements are derivatives of his "contaminated initial statement" which violated his rights as a suspect and in particular his right to a lawyer and the right not to incriminate himself.
In light of the above, the 74-year-old's lawyers called on the Court to exclude the statements of the Accused to the prosecution witnesses presented to the Court.
For his part, the Representative of the Prosecution, Lawyer of the Republic Andreas Hadjikyrou, rejected the positions of the defence and argued for the reasons why the positions and objections of the defence should be rejected.
Mr. Hadjikyrou argued in his speech that the written testimony of the 74-year-old defendant was wilful and that his rights had been explained before this testimony was received and before he gave this testimony, but also that he had renounced those rights in writing.
He also argued for the reasons he considered that the positions expressed by the defence expert should not be taken into account for what he said were "methodological and substantive" reasons.
In addition, Mr. Hadjikyrou noted that the position of the Republic is that the presence of the 74-year-old in the dock was poor and this boils down to the fact that he does not remember critical elements and events while remembering some others, for which he "had an interest in his defence", as he said.
In conclusion, he called on the Court not to accept the defence's positions that it is not wilful for the accused to testify.
