Roles and involvement of the first six defendants in his execution murder of Alkis Campanos explained the prosecutor during the long trial, which continued on the second day in the Mixed Jury Court in Thessaloniki. It is expected that the process will continue tomorrow, when he will refer to the other six and formulate his final verdict of guilt, which, however, has already been “shown” to all the defendants.

Encrypting her conclusions regarding the first six defendants, the prosecutor Kiriaki Klyaba stated the following: she called the first defendant “the mastermind”, emphasizing that he played the role of the director of the assassination attempt. “He determined the positions of his “soldiers”. His goal was not to attack, he had a high level of surveillance in order to contain any of the victims who would run away. He had a leadership and regulatory role,” he said.

“Parody” confession

He described the second defendant’s confession as a “parody” that he had succeeded in delivering a fatal blow to Alkis’s right thigh, causing the femoral artery to be corroded. “There is no such thing as a fatal blow,” the prosecutor explained, and regarding the attitude of a particular man, she said: “He decided to become an expiatory victim. He did not want the truth to shine, and this is worse than a confession,” he said. He accused him of playing with court intelligence with a “fabricated” confession, trying to prove his lie and shake off responsibility from others. “But he I forgot the remaining 40 stabs to Alkis and his best friend who stabbed someone else, not himself, as he tried to convince,” he said.

He pointed out to the third defendant that he had been on the “battlefield” for at least 45 seconds and that he was not a “spectator”. “He participated with his hammer and mercilessly beat everyone he met in front of him,” the prosecutor said.

Promising Vice Captain

As for the fourth defendant, who first fled to Albania and then was handed over to the Greek prosecutors, the prosecutor stressed that he played an important role in the crime: not as a simple good “soldier” as she mentioned, but as a “budding deputy leader” , because he is said to have been the man who, on the fateful night, gathered the individuals involved in the Gate 4 fan club to ensure outnumbered in the face of a deadly attack. For his position in the court, Mr. Klyaba noted that his apologies were based on “lies” and “fictions”. “He thought he could convince us that he was just a spectator of the drama,” he said, noting that the man hit both Alki and his friend.

“He remained at the scene of the attack for 25 seconds, enough time to hit Alkis and his friend with a folding glove,” the prosecutor said of the fifth defendant, adding: “He intended to ‘run away’ after committing the crime. He was not a ‘spectator’ either, he was among those who went to kill.”

He placed the 6th defendant outside the “battlefield”, but emphasized that his help was decisive for the outcome of the case. “He grabs an iron pipe from the trunk, wanting to contribute his “part” to the attack, but did not have time. He was ready to attack,” the prosecutor stressed.

“They used Alka’s blood to tell us they were scared”

Looking back at all the apologies, she stressed that she needed to hear and know the truth. “I didn’t see her, but I didn’t hear her either,” he said and described as false and pretentious what the defendants apologized for. “They wanted to convince us that Alkis accidentally lost his life…” he said, and at another point commented: “They used Alkis’s blood to tell us that they were cold and scared. […] no one was harmed by what they saw […] they showed no remorse.”

Spikes vs. Medical Examiners – Technical Advisors

Previously, Ms Klyaba defended the conclusion of the medical examiner Leda Kovatsis, saying that her scientific conclusions are not subject to any dispute, although, according to him, he was “criticized” by the defense of the 12 defendants, “as if he meant conjecture and arbitrary conjecture.” conclusions”.

The prosecutor fired her arrows at three medical examiners who were witnesses for the defense and accused them of “controversy and misleading the court.” “Their conclusions and judgments are far from our case. They testified in a way that was convenient for the defendants. […] They made serious mistakes. They have forgotten their science,” he said characteristically.