Tully criticizes SPO: Unclear approach regarding the authorship of the documents

Tully criticizes SPO: Unclear approach regarding the authorship of the documents

The Specialist Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) has never clearly presented its arguments regarding the authorship of materials attributed to Rexhep Selimi, Selimi’s lawyer Eric Tully told the court during his closing statement.

“At no point has the SPO clearly explained its arguments regarding the authorship of materials attributed to Selimi, despite the court having made a decision on this matter. This is significant because it could have concrete consequences for the individual… The SPO’s unclear approach to these notes in the final stages of this trial became even more opaque with their strong claims that the words belonged to Mr. Selimi. Had we known these specific allegations earlier in the trial, the defense would have taken a different approach during cross-examination and conducted further investigations regarding the Prosecution’s claims. Here, our defense has been disadvantaged,” he said.

Tully added that what the SPO says and what it actually does appear to be different.

“What the SPO says and what the SPO does seem to be two different things. They say one thing and do another,” he stated.

Selimi’s lawyer emphasized that the SPO presented multiple blocks of notes as evidence, claiming either directly or indirectly that Selimi was the author.

“The SPO has not provided sufficient evidence for the blocks of notes. Throughout the trial, the SPO’s practice, whether directly or indirectly, has been to assert that each of these materials belonged to Selimi—that he was the author. The SPO had many opportunities to clarify which specific materials cited in the documents were attributed to him. They requested that blocks of notes be admitted without any oral evidence. Witnesses were shown individual pages in a suspicious manner during the trial, but it was never established who authored these materials. The Prosecution’s strategic practice appears intentional, designed to leave the defense uncertain until the very end of the trial, unable to determine how to handle these documents. The only refrain repeated by the Prosecution was that these materials were seized from Selimi,” Tully said.

Lexo edhe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *