One of the cases of sexual assault, which arose in the context of the so-called Greek meToo, was unexpectedly closed today by the decision of the Joint Jury against the actor Petros Philippidis.

The verdict of the court will be announced at 2 pm.

Three ordinary judges and four jurors, taking into account all the evidence presented in court, will decide on the indictment against the actor, which includes charges of one rape and two attempted rapes against three of his colleagues.

Both the defendant and the three women who denounced him are looking forward to the judges’ decision today.

The applicants, who have been present at the trial all this time, are awaiting punishment for the fact that, according to them, they suffered from the accused when they asked him for work. The actor is counting on a full justification, as he claims that everything that is attributed to him is “false”.

The case considered by the court is one of the most difficult to prove crimes, which Stella Stoja, the chief prosecutor of the court, emphasized in her speech, calling the crimes of sexual cruelty those that “are not committed in the presence of witnesses” and constitute “invisible crimes”.

“However, there is evidence,” the prosecutor said, referring to the accusations.

With its decision today, the court will show what evidence it accepted and what it considers to be true in the “invisible crimes” against Petros Philippidis.

Categories

The actor is accused of raping a colleague in 2008, which happened twice, as well as trying to rape two other actresses in 2010 and 2014.

The 2008 and 2010 actions allegedly took place in his dressing room, where his colleagues were there for business reasons, and the 2014 case is due to the fact that they took place in his car, after a business meeting he had with an unemployed woman at the time, Patousa. In all three cases, according to the case file, the artist allegedly acted “using their trust in him and the need to find a job.”

The case file makes extensive reference to how Petros Philippidis operated: “He had a methodology and a plan for how he approached his victims, taking advantage of his position in power, his well-known prestige and recognition in the field, being actor, director, troupe leader, sought meetings with his victims on the occasion of receiving a resume, ”it says.

Prosecutor’s proposal

If the judges accept the proposal submitted Jan. 13 by the District Attorney, Ms. Stoya, they should find the defendant guilty of two attempts at rape and not guilty on suspicion of rape.

Ms Stoja held that the rape complainant had shown discrepancies in the statements she had given to the prosecutor, the investigator and finally to the court, and thus questions and doubts were raised.

“I can’t understand exactly what happened,” he said characteristically, emphasizing that the discrepancies he identified in the words of the actress also affect the legal qualification of the acts. “The events may have happened in the way the first applicant tells the court, but the court cannot condemn with ‘maybe’ and ‘maybe’. Which of the versions is true? prosecutor’s office said.

The prosecutor considered the testimonies of the other two women credible and substantiated, demanding that Petros Philippidis be found guilty in these cases. The prosecutor stressed that the two women had convinced her that their testimony was the truth about their experiences.

In her instruction, she emphasized that the court should not accept the defendant’s position regarding “consent” to his actions. As he said of the second applicant: “If everything was consensual, why didn’t she get the role? Why didn’t they ever cooperate afterwards?” Accordingly, with regard to the third applicant, he wondered: “If there was consent, why didn’t she look for him later? Why doesn’t she want to meet him again? There was talk of her diary. The defense said: “How is it possible because of what happened to her that she didn’t write something?” Why write? Why would she write down something terrible that happened to her? Pages in those days are empty. This is also significant.”

In her speech, Ms. Stoya, in a stern tone, wanted to respond to criticism regarding the timing of the three actors’ denunciation of the accused. “Who should tell the victim when to speak? In “why now?” so the answer is because now they felt ready! Because now they felt powerful,” she said, also referring to the conditions that favored such complaints two years ago.

overlord syndrome

In her proposal, Ms. Stoia also made extensive reference to the identity of Petros Philippidis, “the absolute ruler of the theatre, Emperor Philippidis as described by Spyros Bibilas,” said the prosecutor, who said the defendant was suffering from “the lord’s syndrome.”

He said: “He abused his position of power, the accused acted arrogantly, acted overbearingly, acted like a spoiled child who does not hear no. And when he heard no, he became wild. He heard “no” as “yes…”

The prosecutor also asked the judges not to accept the defendant’s statement about an “organized plan” to redistribute the pie at his home, stating that Petros Philippidis’s theory “suffers” because it involves “volunteers” who agreed to expose themselves, while he emphasized that there were no changes to the theatrical the statement after his absence, according to the defendant, was not made.

Judges are not bound to follow the prosecutor’s proposal, so today there is no certainty that a decision similar to Ms. Stoi’s proposal will be announced.

Until the judgment of the judges finds the defendant not guilty and in favor of his guilt, the procedure will continue, so that after examining whether he will be granted mitigating circumstances, a sentence will be pronounced. In this case, the struggle on the part of the accused will be for a suspended sentence, and not for imprisonment.

The trial of Petros Philippidis began in March last year, when the actor was temporarily detained and transferred from prison to the dock.

After 12 months on remand, a court ruled unanimously last July that the ringleader could be released from prison under restrictive conditions.

From the very beginning of the process, famous actors stood next to the three women who were present in court at most of the sessions, while many of them also testified, for example, SEH President Spyros Bibilas, Katya Dandoulaki, Evelina Papoulia, Taliya Matika, Lena Drosaki, Anna Maria Papacharalambous, Zeta Makripulia, Thassos Halkias, Paschalis Tsarouhas, Alexandros Burdumis and others.

Actresses Elina Akritidou and Vicky Protogerakis testified as defense witnesses for Petros Philippidis. They also gave evidence of two directors of the National Theatre, one former and one present, a radio producer, etc.

Source: RES-IPE