Tweet
VICTIMS IN SEROP DER-BOGHOSSIAN SEXUAL ABUSE CASE CONFIRM EARLIER TESTIMONIES IN COURT
epress.am
08.19.2011
Aram Amirzadyan, one of the plaintiffs in the criminal case against
former adviser to the RA prime minister, owner of Metal Prince Ltd.
Corporation and Akhtala Ore Processing Plant CJSC Serop Der-Boghossian,
arrested in February on sex abuse charges, shared with local daily
Aravot the details of the four court sessions closed to the public
that have taken place thus far.
The interview is presented below in part.
How many victims and witnesses are named in this case?
10 victims and 13 witnesses.
How many have been examined thus far?
5 of the victims have been examined.
Has the accused made a motion connected to his health or judicial
rights during the trial?
No. The period of motions has not begun. He is quite a proper
participant in court, subject to the court~Rs legal requirements and
procedures defined by investigating the evidence.
A mother of one of the victims (who are minors) during the trial
didn't want to watch the video or contribute to her son's testimony. A
representative (a teacher) participated and watched the video in
her place.
That is the parent's right.
During the investigation, what position did this parent have? Perhaps
what was said is as a result of a certain influence, or why did a
contradiction arise between you and the victim's parent; that is,
between plaintiffs?
There is no substantial contradiction between the plaintiffs or in
the position of the plaintiffs and the victims. Till now the evidence
examined was substantiating the charges against the accused. None
of the victims have refuted the testimonies they made earlier. And
then, also attached to the case is the physical evidence, the videos
supporting the charges, which are also investigated in court, and no
one has yet disputed these. As for the incident you are referring to,
in this case the victim himself didn't want his mother to be present
during the viewing of the video, to which she agreed.
And does he [i.e. the accused] show any reaction during the screening
of the videos that he shot and kept and which make up the physical
evidence in the case?
We watch the videos. In some cases, he himself points out which video
refers to whom [i.e. which victim].
Is it possible that the trial will be open to the public at any point?
The trial being in camera is due to this being an exceptional case;
that is, in terms of the sexual immunity of the person. In any case,
according to Article 16 of the RA Criminal Procedure Code, the court's
verdict will be announced publicly.
epress.am
08.19.2011
Aram Amirzadyan, one of the plaintiffs in the criminal case against
former adviser to the RA prime minister, owner of Metal Prince Ltd.
Corporation and Akhtala Ore Processing Plant CJSC Serop Der-Boghossian,
arrested in February on sex abuse charges, shared with local daily
Aravot the details of the four court sessions closed to the public
that have taken place thus far.
The interview is presented below in part.
How many victims and witnesses are named in this case?
10 victims and 13 witnesses.
How many have been examined thus far?
5 of the victims have been examined.
Has the accused made a motion connected to his health or judicial
rights during the trial?
No. The period of motions has not begun. He is quite a proper
participant in court, subject to the court~Rs legal requirements and
procedures defined by investigating the evidence.
A mother of one of the victims (who are minors) during the trial
didn't want to watch the video or contribute to her son's testimony. A
representative (a teacher) participated and watched the video in
her place.
That is the parent's right.
During the investigation, what position did this parent have? Perhaps
what was said is as a result of a certain influence, or why did a
contradiction arise between you and the victim's parent; that is,
between plaintiffs?
There is no substantial contradiction between the plaintiffs or in
the position of the plaintiffs and the victims. Till now the evidence
examined was substantiating the charges against the accused. None
of the victims have refuted the testimonies they made earlier. And
then, also attached to the case is the physical evidence, the videos
supporting the charges, which are also investigated in court, and no
one has yet disputed these. As for the incident you are referring to,
in this case the victim himself didn't want his mother to be present
during the viewing of the video, to which she agreed.
And does he [i.e. the accused] show any reaction during the screening
of the videos that he shot and kept and which make up the physical
evidence in the case?
We watch the videos. In some cases, he himself points out which video
refers to whom [i.e. which victim].
Is it possible that the trial will be open to the public at any point?
The trial being in camera is due to this being an exceptional case;
that is, in terms of the sexual immunity of the person. In any case,
according to Article 16 of the RA Criminal Procedure Code, the court's
verdict will be announced publicly.