26th Hearing, Women\u2019s Section, Korydallos Prison, Athens, 6 November 2015<\/b><\/p>\n
1. Court access<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Hearings remain accessible to members of the public, provided they present their identity cards at the entrance. However, the crowd in the courtroom had thinned. The spaces reserved for journalists are almost always occupied. A malfunctioning microphone added to the list of problems with the venue. <\/span><\/p>\n 2. Presence and representation of the defendants<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Seven (7) defendants were present at the beginning of the hearing. Twenty-one (21) were listed as absent. The remaining defendants were represented by their counsel. <\/span><\/p>\n 3. Statements\/comments from the civil counsel regarding the testimony of Dimitris Kourentzis <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Counsel representing the civil action in the case made their statements on the evidence presented in court by policeman Dimitris Kourentzis. <\/span><\/p>\n Andreas Tzelis (for the Fyssas family) began by stating that the witness\u2019s testimony confirms defendant Giorgos Roupakias\u2019 confession, \u201cI did it, don\u2019t tell anyone, I\u2019m a Golden Dawner.\u201d Moreover, it identified the murder weapon and revealed the existence of a criminal organisation, even though the witness could not say it outright. The witness\u2019s testimony reveals that Roupakias was trained by Golden Dawn and was \u201cmade out of the flesh and blood of the organisation\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n Ellada Christopoulou, who then took the floor, commented on Roupakias\u2019 behaviour after the killing, particularly his carefreeness in the patrol car. She placed particular emphasis on the gravity of the threats received by Kouretzis. <\/span><\/p>\n Violetta Kougatsou referred to the actions of the Dias motorcycle police unit on the night, whose officers merely restrained bystanders rather than prevented the murder. She said \u201cPavlos died helplessly, killed on front of the police. These policemen did not represent the Greek people.\u201d As regards Roupakias\u2019 behavior after the murder, she dwelt on Kourentzis\u2019 statement that he had seen people petrified by shock, and Roupakias was not one of them. She concluded that Roupakias could not have remained so calm if he didn\u2019t have some form of backing. Regarding the threats received by Kourentzis, Kougiatsou suggested that they are confirmed by the witness appearing afraid to state that he is aware of the slogan \u201cBlood, Honour, Golden Dawn\u201d or the identity of Golden Dawn\u2019s leaders, both of which are common knowledge.<\/span><\/p>\n Eleftheria Tompatzoglou made the same point, arguing that the witness\u2019s reluctance to answer any question directly regarding the organisation and activity of Golden Dawn demonstrated his profound fear.<\/span><\/p>\n Chrysa Papadopoulou noted that Kourentzis had also confirmed the presence of 4\u20135 men and the exact time of the murder. She added that Kourentzis had arrived on the scene at once and done everything right. The contradictions between the testimony of Dias officer Giorgos Rotas and that of Kourentzis need to be clarified. <\/span><\/p>\n Thanasis Kampagiannis (for the Egyptian fishermen) commented that, together with Kourentzis, four policemen have confirmed that Golden Dawn as an organisation was present and actively participated in the murder. In addition, the physical perpetrator said minutes after the killing that he was a Golden Dawner, which shows the organised nature of the crime. His confession and Golden Dawn leader Nikos Michaloliakos\u2019 acceptance of political responsibility for the murder are proof that Golden Dawn was behind the crime. Roupakias\u2019 statement, \u201cI\u2019m one of you guys\u201d demonstrates Golden Dawn\u2019s protection by the state authorities, notably by the police, which, on that night \u201chardly behaved honourably\u201d. Finally,\u00a0 <\/span>Kampagiannis commented that Kourentzis\u2019 statement that police headquarters knew that Golden Dawners were attacking foreigners will be of particular interest in the Egyptian fishermen\u2019s case. <\/span><\/p>\n His colleague Kostas Papadakis stressed that, as article 351 of the code of criminal procedure allows the court to determine the order of witnesses, it might be useful to have all of the policemen testify consecutively. The ease with which, according to Kourentzis, Roupakias interacted with the police should concern the court and the prosecutors. Moreover, he insisted on the following points: Kourentzis was originally called to testify before investigating magistrates eight months after the murder; the Dias motorcycle police remained at an 80-meter distance from Fyssas and it was not they, but a friend of Fyssas, who pointed out the killer to the witness; the killer confessed after Kourentzis told him he had found DNA and fingerprints on the murder weapon; the witness\u2019s confession inside the patrol car demonstrated his sense of security \u2013 a justified one given the organisation\u2019s assault divisions are supported by the Greek police. The conversation inside the patrol car was kept secret until 8 May 2014; moreover, Michaloliakos assumed political responsibility for the murder, which Golden Dawn had initially denounced publicly. Michaloliakos\u2019 claiming of political responsibility for the murder has concerned the entire nation; Papadakis suggested that it should concern the court and the prosecutor as well. <\/span><\/p>\n Takis Sapountzakis (for the PAME trade unionists) stressed that Kourentzis\u2019 testimony confirmed the existence of a criminal organisation. Roupakias had been informed, he directed himself to the specific bar, killed Fyssas and emerged unscathed and entirely calm; he smoked, he tried to escape but didn\u2019t manage it. According to Sapountzakis, Roupakias was a hit-man, a cog in a plan devised by the higher-ranking organs of the organisation. Roupakais thought that the police were Golden Dawn. Someone must have said to him, \u201cMy boy, go and make a kill; no one will stop you.\u201d The threats against the witness were made a few days before his testimony; the threats were made \u201cby those who stand accused and who are threatened by his testimony.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n His colleague Antonis Adanasiotis dwelt on the brazenness with which the criminal organisation acts; it believes it is invulnerable, a belief that makes it all the more dangerous. <\/span><\/p>\n Eleni Zafiriou (also for the PAME members) focused the first part of the evidence (before the break), during which time the witness had answered her questions regarding Golden Dawn\u2019s modus operandi, referring to the assault divisions\u2019 attacks. She continued to note that following the defence\u2019s attack on the witness and the consequent commotion in the courtroom that led to the break, the witness returned and answered all remaining questions pertaining to the assault divisions by insisting that he didn\u2019t know anything. He even claimed not to recognise leading Golden Dawn figure MP Ilias Kasidiaris when he was shown a picture of him. This is a clear case of witness intimidation, as is shown by his plea to the court to make security provisions for him and his family. <\/span><\/p>\n Thodoros Theodoropoulos (also for the PAME members) commented on the initial report to the police station: that there were Golden Dawn members holding bats, etc., and connected these people to the final outcome: the murder of Fyssas. The fact that, following his arrest and detention at the police station, Roupakias was left in a room on his own, his phone was not confiscated and he made six phone calls to the Golden Dawn cell leader in Nikea shows that the hard core of the state abetted the cover-up. <\/span><\/p>\n Angelos Vrettos commented on the fact that Kourentzis knew of the attack on the PAME trade unionists and insisted that this demonstrates the planned and uniform activities of the organisation. The civil action raised the issue of the threats to Kourentzis because of the existence of a criminal organisation which is outlined in the indictment. <\/span><\/p>\n Haris Stratis spoke of the threats received by Kourentzis, and by witnesses Pavlos Seirlis and Dimitris Melachrinopoulos as well. He said he was sure that many more witnesses would come forward to say that they have been threatened; this is the organisation\u2019s tactic for enforcing a law of silence. <\/span><\/p>\n Manos Malagaris said that differences between testimonies did not necessarily amount to contradictions. He mentioned the example of whether Roupakais was smoking or not \u2013 a matter raised by the prosecutor. He insisted that Roupakias was not smoking to calm his nerves; rather, he was simply sitting in the car waiting to run away with his people. It is a criminal organisation that acts in unison and escapes in unison. <\/span><\/p>\n 4. Statements\/comments from the defence regarding Kourentzis\u2019 testimony <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Counsel representing the civil action in the case made their statements on the evidence presented in court by policeman Dimitris Kourentzis.<\/span><\/p>\n Christoforos Tsagkas (for Ioannis Aggos, Giorgos Germenis and Anastasios Michalaros) took the floor. He referred to the witness\u2019s statement that Roupakias could have run away if he had wanted and argued that this invalidated arguments that this was a premeditated and professional attack. He added that the civil counsel\u2019s claim that the law enforcement and judicial authorities cover for Golden Dawn will be dealt will be judged. At this point, the presiding judge responded:\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cWhere did you hear that? This is the first we\u2019ve heard of it?\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n N. Kontovazenitis (for Anastasios Anadiotis) referred to the crowd on Tsaldari St, and said that no crimes or complicity in crimes took place there. Finally he said that Kourentzis did not confirm that Melachrinopoulos was present at the murder scene. <\/span><\/p>\n Dimitra Velentza said that Kourentzis, like the other witnesses, did not make any points relevant to the indictment. <\/span><\/p>\n Vasilis Oplantzakis elaborated on purported contradictions and discrepancies in Kourentzis\u2019 testimonies, specifically as regards the matter of who identified the murderer to him and the 4\u20135 people who surrounded Fyssas after the fact: Kourentzis said they were his friends, while Panagiotis Fyssas had testified that they were policemen and \u201cstrange people\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n Giorgos Roumpekas (for Giorgos Roupakias) began by referring to Kourentzis\u2019 testimony an \u201can exaggeration\u201d and insisted that Roupakias must have been sitting in the car waiting to be arrested and, seizing the opportunity, lit a cigarette. Kourentzis, Roumpekas said, \u201cexperienced his first arrest like in the movies, slightly American\u201d. He concluded that the conditions in which the car was found: parked on the wrong side of the road, the engine and lights still on, signalled that something violent had happened to the driver; he must have been threatened into getting out. Roupakias\u2019 version, the real version, according to Roumpekas, is that Fyssas and his friends attacked him. <\/span><\/p>\n Angelos Angeletos stated that Kourentzis\u2019 testimony was inspired by the American series CSI<\/i>. He added that defence counsels, too, had been the subject of threats; four of their offices have been burnt down. <\/span><\/p>\n Giorgos Michalolias asked why civil counsel did not question Rotas about threats made against him, and concluded that civil counsel\u2019s strategy is to attribute any elements in witnesses testimonies they find inconvenient to a supposed fear. <\/span><\/p>\n Pangiotis Michalolias began by saying that, typically, he should not be commenting on the Kourentzis\u2019 testimony because he was telling the truth. Another reason for not commenting was because he represented Nikos Michaloliakos, to whose trial the civil action has not been admitted, even though it has continued with its political agenda of supporting the charges against his client. He also said that civil counsel\u2019s offer to help witnesses uncover the facts surrounding the threats they have received makes him suspicious as to their source. Finally, he called on civil counsel to respect the judicial order by refraining from calling Golden Dawn a criminal organisation, a request that was met with the strong reaction from civil counsel. Regarding Michaloliakos\u2019 claiming of political responsibility for the murder, the counsel said that the defence would present a video of the actual statement. <\/span><\/p>\n Periklis Stavrianakis stated that if the murder had been planned, there would not have been a car, but motorbikes. He added that Kourentzis did not refer at all to \u201cassault divisions,\u201d a term coined by then public order minister Nikos Dendias and later used by the prosecutor. <\/span><\/p>\n Throughout the hearing, a stream of comments, slurs and laughter could be heard from the defence teams, leading the judge to reproach them on several occasions and to threaten to apply the relevant penalties contained in the code on criminal procedure. Characteristic of the defence\u2019s behaviour was their commentary on Kourentzis\u2019 testimony, which included remarks such as \u201cGo and tell them in Perisos\u201d [the Athens district where the Communist Party has is headqaurters] or \u201cNow we\u2019ll get to hear the Communist Party line\u201d. Civil counsel, which protested at what they saw as a tactic to terrorise lawyers and witnesses, requested the court\u2019s protection. The commotion in the courtroom reached its climax during the break when Magda Fyssa threw a bottle of water at Roupakias, saying: \u201cI will not have peace until I hang you, you scum of society\u201d. A member of the defence remarked: \u201cJust get her under control!\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n 5. Testimony of Anastasia Damigou, owner of a cosmetics shop on 62 Tsaldari St <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Although witness Konstantinos Kotsovos had been called to the stand before the break, Anastasia Damidou gave her testimony instead. <\/span><\/p>\n Her evidence, given partly in conversation with the presiding judge, was as follows: \u201cI have owned a shop on 62 Tsaldari St for 15 years. It is on the ground floor. It doesn\u2019t have cameras on the outside, but five on the inside. One of them is near the shop window and catches a little of the pavement outside. It\u2019s an old monitor, with only 18 hours of memory. [The judge then interrupted her to remind her that in her first testimony she had said that the memory lasted five days. The witness responded that it definitely does not last longer than 20 hours.] The day after the murder, when we went to open the shop, the area was in total chaos. It was packed with people and some journalist asked to see the video. We showed it to him and he said he couldn\u2019t see anything beside some shoes. Two days later, the police showed up and asked about the journalist. They said, \u2018Those people will be our ruin.\u2019 I hadn\u2019t told them about the journalist; they already knew. The policeman who showed up was clearly irritated. Then a weird guy came to the shop; he didn\u2019t show me ID or anything. He left me a phone number and said that, if I knew anything, I should tell him.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n In response to the prosecutor\u2019s questions, the witness said that she never saw the video because she didn\u2019t want to; that regardless of what she said in her first testimony, the cameras outside the shop only recorded shoes; that she couldn\u2019t remember how many days later the police came to the shop: it could have been ten days or two weeks. She also said that she didn\u2019t know what the policeman meant when he said, \u201cthose people will be our ruin\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n In response to questions from the civil counsel, the witness said that the cameras are attached high up on the wall and register everything inside the shop. She said she had no interest in watching the video, nor did she know how to do it. She said she couldn\u2019t remember if the journalist showed her ID, but he seemed familiar. He went up to the office, stayed there alone and copied the video to his phone. She couldn\u2019t remember if the policeman who came to the shop was the chief of the Hellenic Police, but she could remember that he was escorted by a policeman in uniform, that he was irritated because the journalists always arrive first and that he didn\u2019t ask for a copy of the video because she must have told him that the archives were deleted. She didn\u2019t know whether a file could be recovered after it has been deleted from the archive. As regards Golden Dawn, she said she knew \u201cwhat everyone knows\u201d; that she hadn\u2019t heard of other attacks, nor did she know whether Tsaldari St had been renamed. On the matter of the \u201cweird guy\u201d, she said he was dirty and badly dressed. He said to her, \u201cI\u2019m in on everything; if you know something, call me.\u201d As regards the murder, the word in the neighbourhood was that \u201cyesterday the Golden Dawners killed the boy, they killed Pavlos; some Golden Dawners attacked him while he was in the area with his friends.\u201d She added that she didn\u2019t want to watch the video out of panic, because of the ruckus and television coverage. She said that she has never seen a Golden Dawn demonstration, or a biker demo, nor does she know of any other incidents. None of her cameras were confiscated by the Hellenic Police. She also said she didn\u2019t know whether the neighbouring shops had surveillance cameras, or if the police went there looking for footage. Later she said that many Golden Dawners could have carried out the murder and that she never called the \u201cweird guy\u201d, whose number she threw away. She said they didn\u2019t have cameras on the outside, because they had rolling shutters and that she never checked what the journalist did with the video. In response to questions from Eleni Zafirou (for the PAME members), the witness said that she was not aware of groups that attack foreigners or workers. Asked whether she knew about the party in the parliament, the witness said that she was being put in a difficult position. <\/span><\/p>\n In response to questions from the defence, the witness said that she didn\u2019t know whether the police were collecting data outside her shop. When Dimitra Velentza asked whether she had made an application to the Hellenic Data Protection Authority for the closed circuit TVs in her shop, she responded that she had never heard of the authority and that she had no idea she was under obligation to maintain the archive for three months following a crime. In response to a question raised by Vasilis Oplantzakis, she said that her shop is 10\u201315 metres away from the murder scene. Finally, in answer to a question from Periklis Stavrianakis, she said that no assault divisions or Golden Dawners had ever bothered her. <\/span><\/p>\n 6. Statements\/comments on the witness\u2019s testimony from both civil and defence counsel<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Andreas Tzelis began on behalf of the civil counsel. He stressed the fact that it took the police a week to ask about the cameras; this, he argued, merely illustrated Golden Dawn\u2019s modus operandi<\/i> and its impunity as regards the police. It is a criminal organisation with connections to a large section of the Hellenic Police. Chrysa Papadopoulou emphasised the witness\u2019s fear of watching the video and her statement that questions regarding Golden Dawn put her in a difficult position. Takis Zotos asked that the court request a copy of the video aired by Alpha TV and opined that the witness was indifferent. Kostas Papadakis focused on the police\u2019s negligence in the days following the murder and suggested that such practices nurtured a pervasive fear of engagement among citizens. Eleni Zafiriou responded to the witnesses\u2019 replies to questions regarding the assault divisions, and spoke of the direct pressure exerted on witnesses, who were \u201cordinary people who cannot defend themselves against direct or indirect threats\u201d. Angelos Vrettos stressed that the footage was never confiscated by the police, engendering a suspicion that the organisation had the support of the \u201cdeep state\u201d, which was also supported by the fact that the witness was only called to give a a statement seven months later. <\/span><\/p>\n On behalf of the defence, N. Kontovazenitis said that the witness spoke the truth, Dimitra Velentza referred to blatant contradictions and vague words and insisted that the witness was obliged to submit the material to the police. Vasilis Oplantzakis said that even if the camera had registered something, the distance was such that the material would not have helped the court build a case for direct complicity. Giorgos Roumpekas said that the witness was relaxed, and seemed ambivalent to the events and asked again that Roupakias not be referred to as the murderer or Golden Dawn as a criminal organisation, but rather as an \u201calleged criminal organisation\u201d. Finally, Markopoulos referred to the media\u2019s influence on the witnesses\u2019 testimonies, while Periklis Stavrianakis focused on the witness\u2019s statement that \u201cGolden Dawn did it\u201d, suggesting a ploy to extend responsibility and to exploit a tragic event. <\/span><\/p>\n The court adjourned until Tuesday 10 November 2015 at 9am. <\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" 26th Hearing, Women\u2019s Section, Korydallos Prison, Athens, 6 November 2015 1. Court access Hearings remain accessible to members of the public, provided they present their identity cards at the entrance. However, the crowd in the courtroom had thinned. The spaces reserved for journalists are almost always occupied. A malfunctioning microphone added to the list of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1693,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[184,15],"tags":[18,69,65,87,87,97,97],"class_list":["post-1752","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-184","category-trial","tag-criminal-organisation","tag-fyssas-murder","tag-neo-nazi-party","tag-egklimatiki-organosi-en","tag-tagmata-efodoy-en"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1752","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1752"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1752\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2820,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1752\/revisions\/2820"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1693"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1752"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1752"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goldendawnwatch.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1752"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}