With counter-accusations and strong allegations concerning the key witnesses of the third inquest into the death of Thanasis Nikolaou, the final pleas were concluded before the coroner Doria Varosiotou.
The latter is tasked with determining the cause of death of Nikolaou, setting the date for May 10th, the day she will announce her verdict.
Thanasis’ body was found under a bridge in Alassa in 2005 and his death was deemed by the army and police as a suicide. But after his remains were exhumed in 2020 over suspicions of foul play, further autopsies showed he had been beaten and strangled.
On one hand, the Nikolaou family claimed that the cause of death of the 26-year-old was strangulation and that he was murdered by a left-handed perpetrator, contrary to the stance and position supported by the Legal Service, which argued that it has not been conclusively proven whether the defect in the hyoid bone occurred during life, post-mortem, or due to its construction, urging the court to leave the verdict open regarding the cause of death.
Both sides submitted their extensive pleas in writing yesterday, orally referencing the most significant points of their argument to the Court.
Speaking for approximately an hour, the representative of the Legal Service directed jabs at Dr. Karagianni, launching severe accusations regarding her statements before the Court.
She claimed that “she arbitrarily concluded the cause of death to be strangulation during life. I regret to observe that the non-scientific adequacy of Ms. Karagianni was highlighted.”
The family’s lawyers, Leto Kariolou and Athena Dima argued that the new findings that emerged after the exhumation indisputably prove that Thanasis Nikolaou was murdered in an unknown location by a group of perpetrators in which individuals from the Evmeneios Panagiotou camp participated.
“From these new elements, the conclusion that the cause of death was strangulation is irrefutable beyond any doubt,” and they called on the coroner to adopt the findings presented before her.
Beyond the aforementioned, the lawyers pointed out that the stance of the Legal Service reveals tactics of desperate defence and highlighted that Dr. Agapitos attempted to mislead the Court.
The proceedings of the pleas began from the side of the representative of the Legal Service, who referred to significant points regarding the death inquests and the investigations conducted over the years concerning the case of Thanasis Nikolaou.
Regarding the histological examinations of the hyoid bone conducted in Athens, Xenofontos stated that no haemosiderin granules were detected, nor any other histological findings.
She further mentioned that in the scientific examinations, it was determined that the extracts made from various areas of the deceased’s clothing did not match the extracts from the samples with seawater.
She extensively referred to the two reports of Dr. Agapitos regarding the case, emphasizing that during the specific histological examination, they were searching for haemosiderin granules to determine if there was a wound during life.
She noted that despite an examination of the entire bone, no haemosiderin granules or any other histological findings were detected.
“Dr. Karagianni, instead of declaring, as she should have, that from her examination simply no findings emerged to assist the forensic doctors in concluding regarding the significance of the defect…, acted unscientifically and arbitrarily, leading to formulating a conclusion in her report, which does not at all substantiate,” Xenofontos emphasized, also pointing out that Karagianni is not a forensic pathologist but a general pathologist.
Conclusively, she proposed to the Court that the verdict remains open regarding the cause of death, as well as whether the death of the unfortunate Nikolaou was due to an illegal act or suicide, and whether actions or acts of third parties contributed or not, lacking forensic medical opinion before the Court, which evaluates all findings – autopsy-scene-exhumation-totality of events constituting the case.
“We believe that without histological findings, it is not feasible to safely answer the question whether the three-millimetre defect in the left horn of the hyoid bone occurred during life, post-mortem, or due to its construction,” she noted, emphasizing that the conclusion about the circumstances of death must be irrefutable beyond any doubt.
In the speech representing Nikolaou’s family, Leto Kariolou emphasised that the cause of Thanasis Nikolaou’s death was strangulation.
She also pointed out that the Legal Service and its representative insisted on the unimpeded defence of Panicos Stavrianou.
“It is indicative that the representative of the Attorney General called the application for exhumation abusive,”‘ she pointed out.
“Their aim was to mislead the Court, primarily to defend Stavrianou and his accomplices.”
She stressed that the new findings after the exhumation prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Thanasis Nikolaou was murdered in an unknown location by a group of perpetrators which included individuals from the Evmeneios Panagiotou camp.
She also referred to the incidents that preceded the discovery of the 26-year-old’s dead body and the instances of bullying he had received.
Kariolou pointed out that in the second part of their written speech, they had analysed all the expert reports submitted to the Court, highlighting the forensic report of Stavrianou and his “obviously erroneous, superficial and untenable findings”.
Regarding the post-exhumation evidence, she stated that it irrefutably concludes beyond any reasonable doubt that the cause of death was strangulation, and called on the coroner to adopt the findings presented to her.
She indicated that the Legal Service’s stance revealed desperate defence tactics and offensive attacks on Karagianni.
“The Legal Service’s stance saddens me. I mention that even at this third inquest, the cover-up is being reinforced,” Ms Kariolou said, adding that the Legal Service had chosen to call Stavrianou as a witness and supported his claims through another testimony, to reject Matsas’ findings.
Taking the floor, attorney Athena Dima made extensive references and directed the court to the findings and reports of the pathologists.
“I was saddened to hear the insults towards Ms Karagianni. To me, this shows a lack of arguments. Ms Karagianni is on the list of experts of the Athens Forensic Service,” she said, adding that Dr Agapitos tried to mislead the Court and was not chosen at random by the Legal Service.
She also stressed that the cause of death was clearly established by Karagianni despite the attacks and insults from the Attorney’s Office.
“Ms Karagianni studied the entire file that was handed over to her. She demonstrated the method of strangulation accurately. She went as far as to say that the strangler was left-handed,” she said.
Once the speeches were completed, the Judge, Doria Varoshiotou, asked the representative of the Legal Service about Dr Agapitos’ fee.
She made it clear that she was asking for the purposes of transparency, and following a discussion, it was ascertained that Dr Agapitos’ invoice had been submitted as an exhibit, and his fee amounted to €7,350.
It should be noted that outside the courthouse entrance, there are representatives of the Pancyprian Committee of Mothers-Relatives of National Guardsmen, expressing their solidarity with Thanasis Nikolaou’s family.
