The trial on the case of theft
committed from the «Moscow» cinema lasted for more than 2.5 years underwent
pivotal changes in recent months. One of the defendants, Stepan Hovakimyan gave
a self-incriminating testimony. While the prosecutor Ashot Galstyan refused the
charges brought against Vahram Кerobyan on the court session of September 6.

The articles that are in the
ground of charges were also changed. Thus, the Article 38 (Accomplices) of the
RA Criminal Code has been canceled. The only accused in the case is Stepan
Hovakimyan who is charged with the theft committed in particularly large amount
(Article 177.3 (1) and is punished with imprisonment for the term of 4 to 8
years, with or without confiscation of property.

To remind, Stepan Hovakimyan
and Vahram Qerobyan  are charged for
theft of 5 million 80 thousand ADM and 10 000 RUB from the «Moscow» cinema.
They have spent more than two years in preliminary detention. The ground for
detention was Hovakimyan's self-incriminatory testimony which he insisted was extorted
in result of torture.  

Until July 26, 2012 no other
evidence proving the guilt was presented at the Court of General Jurisdiction
of Kentron and Nork Marash administrative districts. Meanwhile, Vahram Qerobyan
’s mother Rusanna Qerobyan  testified at
the court and said that Hovakimyan gave the key of the cash desk of the cinema and
convinced him to enter the cash desk and commit a theft. Qerobyan  had refused.

Prior to this testimony,
Hovakimyan made an attempt of self-injury at the court room. The same day Qerobyan
 was released on bail. During the court
session of August 30 Hovakimyan confessed his guilt and confirmed that Qerobyan
 is innocent. Everything looks to be done
in the bounds of law but many questions remained without answers.

Why Qerobyan ’s mother who
cried every time she saw her son behind the bars testified about Hovakimyan's
guilt and innocence of her son only after 2, 5 year of silence? Why the
prosecution considered Qerobyan  equally
guilty and rejected his mother’s testimony about his innocence and that he
would not abscond the investigation? Why everyone at the court was silent about
the fact that no other evidences exist in the case, the sum that was taken is
not proved and there is a video showing that neither Qerobyan nor Hovakimyan
had committed the theft. Why Qerobyan  was deprived of his liberty for 2.5 years if
he is innocent? 

These questions were not
answered at the court. Neither the parties of the case provide the answers.
Silence and locked doors of the court rooms after the sessions and followed
discussion raised the question that those who are silent posses the
information. 

Defense lawyer Lusine Sahakyan
who was involved recently to Qerobyan ’s case provided with just one answer to
the questions posed by www.hra.am
.

“We cannot tell why there was
nothing so far because we were not involved from the beginning. Our client had
not committed a crime and he should have not been deprived of his liberty. Thus
his mother testified and presented the reality and you see our client was acquitted”,
said Sahakyan.

Hovakimyan’s father Beniamin
Hovakimyan who struggles almost three years for his son’s rights is unwilling
to comment. He just says that it is apparent that self-incriminating testimony
raises many questions as his son insisted he is innocent for 2.5 years and his
guilt was not proved during the court sessions.

The sum of the stolen money is
not proved

At today's session
representative of the «Moscow» cinema theatre Norayr Azatyan presented a
written request to the court with the demand to seize stolen 5 million 80
thousand AMD and 10 thousand RUB. Thus he disagreed with Hovakimyan’s testimony
where the latter insisted that had stolen 2.5 million AMD and 10 thousand RUB.
This request was presented by the newly appointed prosecutor Ashot Galstyan.

It has to be mentioned that the
sum of the stolen money is not proved because the accountant and the cashier
presented contradictory testimonies and these testimonies were changing from
time to time. It was not determined who signed the documents; there are bad
mistakes which are impossible if software is used, the dates indicated in the
documents do not correspond to the previous testimonies given by the accountant
and the cashier. There is no factual evidence proving that there were Russian rubles.

Qerobyan ’s defense lawyer
Sahakyan believes that the size of the sum is not proved and the sum indicated
in Stepan Hovakimyan’s testimony should be taken as a ground. While
Hovakimyan’s defense lawyer Tigran Safaryan had not express any opinion, he
will leave Armenia soon and another lawyer Aram Thughuryan will present
Hovakimyan’s interests who is not familiar with the case materials.

As far as Tchughuryan needs
time to get aquatint with the case, judge Mkhitar Papoyan decided that
Azatyan's and prosecutor's request should be discussed at the next session on
September 14, 14:00.