“The claim is just a comedian, it wouldn’t even be worthy of comment, unless it came from a party leader”
Comic is characterized by the Association of Judges and Prosecutors reference to Stefanou Kasselaki how the president of the court who failed to do so where you were interrupted the proceedings before he was saying the conviction.
“The claim, which for anyone who has the elementary contact with criminal proceedings is simply a comedian, would not even be worthy of commentary, unless he came from a party leader, who has institutional status and responsibility – primarily against the citizens – to stand by his respect and respect for her by law “predicted and extremely common in practice”.
“The attempt to associate the legally projected and extremely common, interruption of the meeting in order for the judge to study the legal and substantive allegations of the trials before it has ruled, indicates either deeply ignorance of legal proceedings or unchanged cynicism against the lawyer.” “Those who, through self -referential conspiracy theories, who apparently seek political promotion, put judicial officers who vigorously perform their duties, instead of exposing justice, are exposed.”
The entire announcement is as follows:
We were informed by the media that in view of the issuance of a decision of the Athens Criminal Court dated 08.05.2025, which was charged with Mr Kasselakis, the above political leader publicly claimed that the fact that the presidency and the presidency of the first -person procedure and the presidency of the first day. Speaking to the ruling, it relates to a procedure for affecting its judicial crisis by third parties.
The allegation, which for anyone who has elementary contact with criminal proceedings is simply a comedian, would not even be worthy of commentary, unless he came from a party leader, who has institutional status and responsibility – primarily against the citizens – to stand seriously and respect for him. Therefore, the attempt to associate the legally projected and extremely common, interruption of the meeting in order for the judge to study the legal and substantive allegations of the actors before it has ruled, It indicates either deeply ignorance of legal proceedings or unforgivable cynicism over truth and judicial independence. The questioning of a judicial decision by each accused or convicted may be respected through remedies or scientific criticism. On the contrary, those who, through self -referential conspiracy theories, who obviously seek political promotion, put judicial officers who vigorously perform their duties, instead of exposing justice, are exposed.
Maria Zacharopoulou