Rexhep Selimi’s lawyer, Geoffrey Roberts, opened his statement before the court by saying that the Special Prosecution itself should be ashamed of its arguments against Selimi.
He said that if the Prosecution is not convinced by its own arguments against Selimi, how could it possibly convince the court.
Selimi’s lawyer described it as troubling and surprising that the Prosecution has been unable to distinguish between allegations and evidence.
“The Prosecution’s inability to distinguish between allegations and evidence is equally troubling at this stage of the trial, and also surprising. Its inability to handle other points related to the ‘joint criminal enterprise’ highlights the lack of clarity and confidence the Special Prosecution has in its own arguments… There are so many evidentiary gaps that the court should not rely on them in any way,” Roberts said.“The Prosecution’s inability to distinguish between allegations and evidence is equally troubling at this stage of the trial, and also surprising. Its inability to handle other points related to the ‘joint criminal enterprise’ highlights the lack of clarity and confidence the Special Prosecution has in its own arguments… There are so many evidentiary gaps that the court should not rely on them in any way,” Roberts said.
Selimi’s defense also argued that the Prosecution has changed its narrative against their client.
