On 6 May, Court hearing in the case of Ernest Yenokyan, who is accused of murder, was held at the “Ajapnyak 1” seat of the Criminal Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan. The Presiding Judge Roman Smbatyan.
According to the accusation, on 20 August, 2023, at around 4:30 p.m., Ernest Yenokyan illegally killed Adrianna Garnik Lima, after which he damaged the apartment owned by Artur Rafik Sargsyan by arson, causing a property damage of large amounts 3,466,000 RA AMD.
It is noted that on 20 August, 2023, at around 4:15 p.m., in order to demand back the 400,000 drams previously lent to Adrianna Lima, he visited 1 Yeznik Koghbatsi Street, apt. 59 in Yerevan, owned by Artur Sargsyan, which Lima was renting. During the conversation on the issue of money, Adrianna Lima told Ernest Yenkoyan that she owes him only AMD 100,000.
In connection with the issue of money, Ernest Yenokyan uttered sexual insults at Adrianna Lima, and the latter, accepted painfully and taking the knife from the apartment, tried to force Ernest Yenokyan out of the apartment by threatening him with a knife.
Seeing all that, Ernest Yenokyan took the knife from Adrianna Lima’s hand and stabbed her many times with the intention of killing her illegally. As a result of her injuries, Adrianna Lima died at the scene.
Ernest Yenokyan burned Adrianna Lima’s bedroom clothes with the lighter he had, after which he closed the door of the apartment with the key and escaped.
According to Iravaban.net, the defense objected to the video recording and taking photos of the Court session, the Court allowed the video recording of the Court and the injured party, together with the Public Prosecutor.
Let’s remind that in the previous Court session the Public Prosecutor announced that the videos with the participation of Ernest Yenokyan will be presented during this Court session. It can be seen in the videos how the latter car approached the building where Adrianna lived, he got out of the car, entered the building, and hours later he came out with two bags in his hands and left the area.
3 witnesses were supposed to be questioned at this Court session, summonses were sent to them, but they did not appear. Regarding one of the witnesses, a request was sent through the Border Electronic Information System (BEIS), as a result of which it was found that the witness was not in RA.
Regarding witness Arusyak Yenokyan, the lawyer stated that there was no need to notify through the police, because the latter was properly notified for today’s session, she simply could not appear because the roads were blocked by the protesters.
Summonses will be sent through the police to those witnesses who were summoned but did not appear at the Court session, so that there is clear information whether the mentioned persons were located at those addresses or not.
The issue of the measure of restraint applied to the accused was also discussed at the Court session. The Public Prosecutor stated that there were still fears of the accused hiding from the investigation and fleeing, as well as in order to ensure the fulfillment of the duties imposed on the accused, it was necessary to extend the period of his detention for another 3 months.
The representatives of the victim were also in favor of extending the detention period.
The defender mentioned that during the previous Court session, the Court discussed the mentioned petition and came to the conclusion that there was a possibility of fleeing and obstructing the investigation, the Court recorded that the probability of obstructing the investigation was low, and this low circumstance was due to the fact that the investigation was in progress and was still at the stage of the main court hearings. He said that the accused admitted the act he was accused of, then noted that the Court’s fear of obstructing the investigation did not exist and there was only a possibility of avoiding the investigation.
The likelihood of escape can be changed by using alternative measures of restraint.
The Public Prosecutor stated that in this case, the use of an alternative measures of restraint could not ensure the proper behavior of the accused during the trial, nor could it reduce the risk.
The victim expressed her position, saying: “How can he be released when he has killed my child? Couldn’t you imagine that if he would suddenly be released I would kill him? Whenever he would come out of Jail, I will kill him just on that Day. Because I know so much, give me a chance to say many things about murder and theft. I am aware of everything, I have lived in his house that is why I came from Russia 5 days ago.”
The representative of the defense side stated that these threats are continuous and may become real for the victim’s family, so he asked the Court to take appropriate measures.
After that, a tense atmosphere was created in the Court room, one of the persons present in the Court room started to make remarks without the permission of the Court.
The judge warned that he would apply sanctions.
After listening to the positions of the parties, the Court decided to extend the detention of the accused Ernest Yenokyan for a period of 3 months.
The next Court hearing in this case will be held on 4 June.
Mariam Shahnazaryan
Details in the video.
