Filenews 3 March 2026
Testimony that emerged in the context of investigations into a case of arson of a 28-year-old woman's car, on February 25, led to the arrest of a 17-year-old suspect.
According to the Police, the 17-year-old was arrested in the early hours of Tuesday, pursuant to a court warrant and was taken into custody.
A 32-year-old man was arrested for the same case on February 25, who, after being detained for six days, was released until the completion of the police examinations.
The arson occurred around 2:40 in the early hours of February 25, while the 28-year-old's car was parked in a car park, in an apartment building in the Limassol district.
The fire completely destroyed the car, while the walls of the apartment building were damaged.
The Limassol Police Department is investigating the case.
* * * * * *
A case of robbery, burglary and theft, illegal entry and causing actual bodily harm is being investigated by the Police in Limassol.
Around 1.30 a.m. Today, information was received about an injured woman in a house in Limassol. Members of the Police went to the scene, where they found the 77-year-old at the front door of her house and who had a head injury.
According to what the complainant reported, while she was sleeping, there were two power outages and she left her house in order to check the power switch. The second time returning home, she found that there was a mess in one of the bedrooms, while an unknown man suddenly appeared who had his face covered with a black hood. According to the complainant, the stranger hit her on the head and grabbed two gold chains that she was wearing around her neck, as well as her mobile phone.
The 77-year-old was transported by ambulance to a private hospital in Limassol, where she was found to have a bruise and abrasions on her head and was detained for further treatment as a precaution.
The TAE Limassol continues the examinations.
* * * * * *
The presence and action of the Police last night was intense, throughout Cyprus, with organized patrols in key points of urban areas, with the aim of preventing serious criminal acts, ensuring public order and increasing the sense of security of the public.
As a result of the preventive policing operations, five persons were arrested for various offenses, including speeding.
As part of these operations, during the night, 296 vehicles were stopped for inspection and 351 persons on board were checked. At the same time, 21 inspections of premises were carried out, with the aim of dealing with phenomena of delinquency, from which a complaint emerged.
During traffic checks carried out, 122 complaints were made, concerning various traffic violations, of which two driver complaints for driving under the influence of alcohol stand out. A total of 52 alcohol tests were carried out. Also, as part of the police examinations, six vehicles were detained.
Coordinated policing operations, for the prevention and suppression of crime, continue daily, with an increased/enhanced police presence, targeted controls and immediate operational action, with the aim of increasing the sense of security of citizens/protecting citizens and ensuring public order.
* * * * * *
An important development, which may also affect the criminal case which is before the Criminal Court in Nicosia, occurred at the request of Natalie Tziapura.
The Supreme Court accepted a request by her lawyer Dimitris Tsolakidis and annulled the search order issued by a District Court concerning two safe deposit boxes that the applicant keeps in a bank branch in Nicosia. The search warrant was issued on 1.7.2025 and during the investigations, the amount of €238,000 was found in them. The accused initially obtained permission to issue a privileged Certiorari warrant, which cancelled the above search warrant.
The Court, after referring to the information of the Police and its connection with the long-term convict Giorgos Christodoulou Zavrantonas, noted that in the affidavit of the Police, which was used to issue the contested search warrant, there is only a general and vague reference to information given to the Police on 18.6.2025, without mentioning anything in relation to the source of the information in question. There is not even a reference to the existence of an informant.
Nor did the report of the lawyer, who represented the Legal Service, that the information about the safekeeping of objects from illegal activities was of the highest reliability, according to which a convict in the Central Prison maintains a telephone device with which he communicates with both the applicant and her mother, since as the court found, there was no mention in the oath that the information in question was of the highest reliability. The Court stressed in its decision that it is not enough to refer to information, stripped of anything else, with the result that its dynamics cannot be approached by the Court which is called upon to issue the warrant.
"I conclude that no specific testimony had been put before the lower Court to be able to judge the matter. The learned lawyer, who represents the Attorney General, tried to build on the fact that because other search warrants were executed, on an earlier date, in relation to other premises, of relatives of the applicant, he made the information corroborated in this case. With due respect, I disagree. First of all, let me note the obvious, that what is being examined is whether the specific witness material, which had been put before the lower Court, met the requirements of the search warrant. In any event, in the affidavit used to issue the contested search warrant, there is no mention that the other search warrants were issued on the basis of the same information, while the testimony used to issue the other search warrants is not disclosed either."
But the Supreme Court did not stop there. He found other errors in the affidavit by which the search warrant was secured, since the total amount identified during the execution of the other search warrants, regarding the premises of other persons, the educated lawyer speaks, in his written speech, for the amount of €309,000.67, while the affidavit used for the issuance of the contested search warrant speaks of an amount of €309.67, which he did not dispute at the hearing of the application.
Also, while the information, stripped of anything else, spoke of the applicant receiving only cash money, the product of criminal activity, nevertheless, the search warrant issued, authorized, impermissibly, the confiscation of jewellery and other valuable objects. Following these findings, the judge annulled the search warrant, so anything found can no longer be used in the trial.
* * * * * *
A couple from Limassol was sentenced to imprisonment, which was suspended, after admitting that the husband indecently attacked a minor twice in a private tutoring center, while his wife, the owner of the property, allowed him to work regularly in it and have contact with children without having secured a relevant certificate.
The amazing thing about the case is that it took a total of eight years to be tried, since the offenses were committed until 27/1/2018, while the Court's decision was issued just last week. The accused 63-year-old teacher admitted two charges, that on 27.1.2018, in Limassol, he illegally and indecently attacked a 9-year-old girl, while he had attacked her obscenely and on an unknown date until 27.1.2018, in the same way in the same tutoring center.
His wife admitted that between September 2017 and 27.1.2018, she employed the accused for professional activities, which included regular contact with children, while she had an obligation not to proceed with his employment, unless he would provide a certificate that they were not included in the File kept under Article 22(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Sexual Abuse, Sexual Exploitation of Children and Child Pornography Law 91(I)/2014.
In her decision, Judge Chr. Middleton said that committing an offense of this nature in such an environment directly offends the socially established expectation of child protection, which is the foundation of the educational function. Furthermore, it finds that there was a repetition of the delinquent behaviour against the same minor, at separate times, an element which, regardless of the intensity of each individual act, has some weight, always compared to an isolated and absolutely occasional incident. Particular importance is also attached to the age of the minor, who was about 9 years old, combined with the significant age difference from the perpetrator, who was about 63 years old, which reinforces the inherent inequality of power and vulnerability of the victim.
On the other hand, the Court took into account, as factors restraining the weighting of gravity, that the acts were not accompanied by physical violence, coercion, isolation, deception or a gradual approach, nor did there be any pre-planning in the sense of organized or systematic criminal activity. The actions consisted of momentary touches, over clothes, without sexual motive or purpose, recklessly more, which, although criminally punishable and socially reprehensible, do not belong to the highest degree of seriousness of the obscene attacks that have dealt with the Courts, under the same legal basis.
The Court also took into account the fact that "there is no evidence to demonstrate specific or lasting effects on the mental health or personality of the minor, without this, in any case, downgrading the objective value of the acts and their potential to cause deep mental trauma. In any case, crimes against children, including indecent assaults, even of such a nature and extent as momentary touches over clothing, are of particular disgrace. The need to impose severe and dissuasive penalties has been repeatedly emphasized."
When determining the sentence, it was taken into account that the school had consequences from this development, since it was closed. However, it has been established that this is an intrinsic consequence of offences of this nature, which, although not ignored, cannot act as an essential mitigating factor for the sentence.
Following this, he sentenced the husband to four months in prison and the wife, the owner of the tutoring center, to two months in prison. However, the Court held that direct imprisonment, in the present circumstances, would be mainly punitive in nature, without a corresponding benefit in terms of deterrence or social protection, and would therefore not be proportionate to the actual dimension of the crime in the present case. In this regard, the period of time that has elapsed since the commission of the offenses was also taken into account, which is why it suspended the sentence for three years.
