Tweet
PROSECUTOR DEMANDS TO FINE SHAMSHYAN
A1+
02:16 pm | April 08, 2009
Politics
Today in the Court of General Jurisdiction of Kentron and Nork-Marash
districts, Prosecutor Levon Charkhifalakyan demanded to impose s fine
of 500000 drams on photojournalist Gagik Samshyan.
Remind that the photojournalist is charged with Article 343 of the
Armenian Criminal Code (disrespect for court).
Judge Gagik Avetisyan had banned Gagik Shamshyan to photograph
defendant Smbat Ayvazyan, member of the Hanrapetutyun Party's board,
during a trial. In reply, Shamshyan demanded a decision on the ban.
Registrars and the secretary of the court sittings stated during
the investigation and court sittings that Gagik Shamshyan called the
judge an "idiot, dolt and calf," but the words weren't recorded.
Lawyer Hovik Aresnyan says his client's pretrial evidence fully
corresponds to the audio records of an August 5, 2008, court sitting.
The evidence given by the registrars and the secretary run counter
to the records. Generally, the material evidence, the audio-records,
must correspond to the subjective evidence. Only Shamshyan's evidence
meets the requirements in this case.
The defence is due to make a speech at 10.00, April 15.
A1+
02:16 pm | April 08, 2009
Politics
Today in the Court of General Jurisdiction of Kentron and Nork-Marash
districts, Prosecutor Levon Charkhifalakyan demanded to impose s fine
of 500000 drams on photojournalist Gagik Samshyan.
Remind that the photojournalist is charged with Article 343 of the
Armenian Criminal Code (disrespect for court).
Judge Gagik Avetisyan had banned Gagik Shamshyan to photograph
defendant Smbat Ayvazyan, member of the Hanrapetutyun Party's board,
during a trial. In reply, Shamshyan demanded a decision on the ban.
Registrars and the secretary of the court sittings stated during
the investigation and court sittings that Gagik Shamshyan called the
judge an "idiot, dolt and calf," but the words weren't recorded.
Lawyer Hovik Aresnyan says his client's pretrial evidence fully
corresponds to the audio records of an August 5, 2008, court sitting.
The evidence given by the registrars and the secretary run counter
to the records. Generally, the material evidence, the audio-records,
must correspond to the subjective evidence. Only Shamshyan's evidence
meets the requirements in this case.
The defence is due to make a speech at 10.00, April 15.