A court in The Hague refused to consider alternative versions of the crash of the MH17 flight

The Chairman of the Judicial Board, Hendrik Steinhayes, rejected a motion by the defence of the defendant Oleg Pulatov. He justified the decision by saying that if the prosecutor’s office did not prove the main version of the disaster, the accused would be automatically acquitted.

As Censor.net writes with reference to RBC-Ukraine, the District Court of The Hague refused to consider alternative versions of the crash of the MH17 flight in the Donetsk region in 2014 offered by the defence. This once again eloquently demonstrates that it is not the purpose of the Hague trial to establish the true culprits.

“During the June hearing, the Pulatov Defence demanded that experts and witnesses in the MH17 case be questioned anew, and that all evidence be re-examined and alternative versions of the disaster be considered”, –  the statement says.

Recall that Malaysian Airlines’ Boeing 777, flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was shot down on 17 July 2014 in the Thorez area (DNR). As a result, 298 people were killed.

Comments:

comments powered by HyperComments