The Super Objective is to adjust the Evidence to the Facts of the Case

The first court session on murder, robbery, and especially large embezzlement as a part of a gang was held upon four defendants. Last year the episode of embezzlement of nearly 1 million USD from “Armbusinessbank” was separated from the case and will be examined as a separate case.

The defense presented a number of motions during the hearing. Rafayel Haroyan’s defender Liparit Simonyan filed a petition to call for questioning Vahan Qyaram Galstayn with nickname “Jung”. It is due to notice that one of the defendants Karen Vardanyan, who is accused for the murder of the employee of currency exchange office in Yerrord Mas, testified that he had realized the burglary attacked on the currency exchange office in Yerrord Mas, with Jung, whereas defendants Rafayel and Hayk did not participate in the attack.

Liparit Simonyan noted in his motion that if it is not satisfied, then the principle of adversarial proceedings would be violated.

Hayk Khojoyan’s defender Armen Feroyan filed a motion to invite the experts who carried out the forensic examination to answer some questions on the examination. The lawyer said that the forensic examination revealed that at the scene, on the victim’s clothes, and the fired bullet no blood stains of his client were found. Whereas, according to the indictment, Hayk was wounded at the scene.

A. Feroyan also solicited to call to the court the two eyewitnesses whose testimony were in contradiction. Specifically, the eyewitness Karen Aslanyan initially said that the attacker was wearing white cloths and described his appearance based on which the identikit was made. Notably, the evidence describing the clothing and physical appearance of the attacker provided by the employee of currency exchange office who was wounded and died 8 days later and the evidence provided by the first eyewitness coincided.

However, Karen Aslanyan later testified that the crime was committed by people dressed in black and wearing masks, therefore, could not see their features. Advocate A. Farmanyan noted that “the super objective is to adjust the evidence to the facts of the case.”

Karen Vardanyan’s defender Tamar Baghdasaryan filed a motion to appoint a re-expertise to determine the real cause of the currency exchange office employee. In her petition, she quoted from patient’s history of “Erebuni” Medical Center which informs that the wounded man was undergone surgery on the first day, and indicated that the gunshot wound was blind hole, and their was no way out. However, in the description of actions taken during the surgery there was no indication on the attempt to find and bring the bullet out.

Three days after the second surgery was performed and a metal piece was taken out. And after the third surgery sepsis was diagnosed with the patient.

The killed Hakob Mkrtchyan’s brother, successor in this case objected to all these motions. The accusation prosecutor asked for time to express his position.

The defendant Tigran Hovhannisyan was not in the courtroom again. The sanction imposed against him is still in force.

The next court hearing is scheduled for February 11.

Iravaban.net

  Views:

Other court cases

Court cases videos

Court cases (photo)

Հետևեք մեզ Facebook-ում

  Պատուհանը կփակվի 6 վայրկյանից...   Փակել