The former student of Oxford University is accused of doing hooliganism with weapon, “I have a feeling as if I were an Indian man with feathers”. I know very well the answer to that question, but I want the expert to respond,” the accused, 30 year old R. G., announced during today’s case. He has higher education, and even studied in the Oxford University. He told several times that he did not believe in expert opinion about the video of the incident.
The former student of Oxford University is accused of illegal keeping of a weapon and using it for hooliganism (which was accompanied by violence toward a person). The case is being investigated in the Court of First Instance of Avan and Nor Nork Communities by the presiding judge Davit Harutyunyan.
According to the accusation, in the unknown period he illegally obtained and kept in his rented apartment sport and hunting gun bullets with 5.6 mm caliper made by craftsmanship and provided for shooting, a threaded gun and ammunition, 29 bullets.
Then on 7 July, 2014, at 23:30 o’clock the accused started fighting with 4 men who were playing cards in the arbor, during which he obviously treated them and other residents of the building with irreverent behavior and shot several times with his gun from the window of his apartment, cruelly and intentionally breaking the rest of the people and public order for about 20 minutes. As a result he intentionally damaged Grigor Abroyan’s health, inflicting slight injuries.
A few days ago R. G. was released from arrest, but after the start of the case he has been under arrest for about 6 months. The Court of First Instance of Avan and Nor Nork Communities already satisfied the petition of the defense for three times during the trial, changing the arrest restraint by pledge. But the prosecution appealed the two former decisions of the First Instance Court in the Court of Appeal, which annulled the decision of the First Instance Court: R. G. was released from arrest and arrested again for two times.
During today’s case, the expert who have given conclusions about the video of the incident were questioned. Expert Manukyan has mentioned in his conclusion that it is impossible to identify the faces of the people and the cars in the video because of bad lightning. But he made about 987 photocopies from the video and presented them to the court. To the question of the accused why he made 987 photocopies and not 200, the latter answered that “his favor has become a story”, and that he did not have the obligation of making any photocopy, because he had mentioned that it was impossible to identify something. And he had presented the photocopies, because he worked his best and maybe those copies would be of any use in the future.
The defense was also interested whether it was impossible to identify the “Mercedes” which is quite well noticed in the video. As an answer the expert asked “Can you identify?” The accused said that he could even say the year that the car had been produced.
There were sometimes some outbreaks during the interrogation. And after the serial question when R. G. announced that the expert answered wrong, one of the prosecutors tried to defend the expert, referring to the court, “An obvious pressure is being made on the expert.” And when the judge wondered whether the expert felt depressed, the latter answered “no”. We would like to add that two witnesses had to be interrogated during today’s case, but they did not have identification documents, that are why the interrogation was cancelled.
Iravaban.net
