The court was informed about this an hour in advance, when publication was already “irreversible”, according to a clearly annoyed chairman Hendrik Steenhuis, who spoke of “a fait accompli.” The court had only just decided to make parts of the file available to relatives subject to conditions when the Public Prosecution Service made them public.
Where Steenhuis still expressed himself diplomatically, the defense of suspect Oleg Pulatov went in with a straight leg. The lawyers Sabine ten Doesschate and Boudewijn van Eijck accused the Public Prosecution Service of completely ignoring the principle that a suspect is innocent, until the judge decides otherwise.
In the animation, the Public Prosecution Service consistently speaks of ‘perpetrators’ instead of suspects. Not only are facts presented, but the Public Prosecution Service also colors them, they say. “Convictions of the Public Prosecution Service are presented as facts. Also untenable accusations that the defense has extensively refuted.”
‘The Public Prosecution Service has shaped public opinion’
The name of Oleg Pulatov is mentioned 44 times in the animation. The defense’s input is completely ignored, says Ten Doesschate. “The Public Prosecution Service has deliberately shaped public opinion. A climate has now been created in which an idea other than that of the Public Prosecution Service about what happened will no longer be accepted.”
During the sessions, the Public Prosecution Service did not discuss the defense’s plea, but a ‘ridiculous corruption’ of it. According to the defence, there is no longer any question of a fair trial.
Ten Doesschate also denounced statements by one of the public prosecutors in an interview, which would give the impression “as if a possible acquittal only means that it cannot be proven what the suspects have done.
‘Buk missile could have been pure deception’
The lawyers believe that the Public Prosecution Service has conducted a flawed investigation. Not only to the question of which projectile exactly hit flight MH17, but also to the question of whether the tapped conversations between the suspects may have been misinterpreted.
According to the lawyers, the talks that talk about a Buk missile may have been pure deception of the enemy. And was often driven around in the war zone with non-functioning launch installations to deter the enemy.
The lawyers say that it cannot be ruled out that flight MH17 was brought down by a weapon other than a Buk missile. According to them, the research has focused too much on just that scenario.
The defense was accused of having provided insufficient evidence for an alternative scenario, but at the same time “the Public Prosecution Service resisted tooth and nail” against an investigation into an alternative scenario requested by the defense, according to Van Eijck. According to him, the Public Prosecution Service did not respond at all to many substantiated positions, or it responded to statements that the defense did not posit at all.
Ten Doesschate and Van Eijck believe that Oleg Poelatov should be acquitted. The Public Prosecution Service has demanded life sentences against him and the three other suspects Sergey Dubinsky, Leonid Chartsjenko and Igor Girkin for the shooting down of flight MH17 on July 17, 2014. All 298 on board were killed.