The defense lawyers held their speeches. 

Defense of Ukrainian state – lawyer Bertolini Clerici

In his opinion the dynamics of events recounted by the state prosecutor went beyond the 1st grade verdict with creative interpretations. Also Italy should not work on this case at all cause the murder happened in Ukraine. Journalist Ilaria Morani’s article, used by the Italian authorities to detect Mr. Markiv, is not reliable (written in a café). The lawyer mentioned how Ukrainian army never committed any human rights violation as documented by Andy Rocchelli, by many journalists on site and by Human Rights Watch. HRW reports about a ukrainian bombing of a psychiatric hospital in Semenovka to escape which all patients were in the cellar. So nobody got hurt. Anyway Ukrainian army was deployed for defense-only purposes, always targeting things instead of people.   Markiv’s defense, lawyer Rapetti:

In her opinion William is an unreliable witness, a boy who doesn’t see the difference between a kalashnikov and a mortar (although he was targeted by one). Ms Rapetti underlined his supposedly being in a state of shock. Slaviansk and Donbass were war zones at the time and Andy and Andrey went there recklessly, unaware of the risk. The autopsy of Andy’s corpse confirmed his death due to metallic splinters, however Ms Rapetti deems as not clear the connection between those and the mortar fire. Hypothesis of cross-fire.The court of justice in Pavia operated therefore inaccurately, far from a scientific approach, neglecting all laws of physics and maths. Markiv’s defense, lawyer Della Valle:

The lawyer mentioned how his speech was crucial to dissipate all rumors and that might have an impact on the court and on public opinion: the president of the court declared that this was a serious offense for the Milan court of justice and for all italian magistrates. The six hours speech can be sum up as: the verdict issued by Pavia court of justice can’t be valid because it was driven by bias, mis-information, the state prosecutor’s conscience problems, fake news and open sources (e.g. Google Earth etc). In order to stop the spread of covid-19, only three journalists were admitted to the courtroom (making shifts) and a plaintiff for each civil part. Ukraine minister of internal affairs, Mr. Avakov, came again to the hearing. The next session will take place on November 3rd.

The judicial authority should never take sides and the geopolitical issues related to the russian-ukrainian conflict must be left out of the court. This is one of the main points stated by the general Attorney Nunzia Ciaravolo in her indictment during the court hearing of October 15th at the appeals process for the murder of Andrea Rocchelli and Andrej Mironov.

During the latest weeks, similarly to what happened during the most intensive phases of the first degree trial, we had to witness all possible kinds of interference of politics in the field of justice. We saw senators showing up at the hearings. We heard of emails and phone calls aimed to influence the jury. There were demonstrations and documentaries. Last but not least, the inappropriate move by the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, who urged Giuseppe Conte to take action in order to free Vitaly Markiv, already sentenced to 24 years at that time.

We don’t think this is a private affair, the story of a Fenoglio’s Milton of our times, with history in the background. Andy’s murder is a public matter, we know that and we stated that many times. It has to do with human rights, with our right to be informed about facts that happen in the theatres of war. Hence, it has implications on the protection of whoever happens to be unwillingly at war, i.e. civilians. Ukrainian civilians, Donbass’ civilians as well. Therefore, it has political consequences. But this isn’t a political trial. 

Some poisoners of wells are trying to represent this judicial story as a clash between clans. They act in bad faith as they want to free Markiv in order to score a point for the nationalist Ukrainian team. But they’re missing the point, since we are not watching a Ukraine-Russia match here. We are fighting for the rights and the protection of civilians to be reaffirmed everywhere, particularly in those critical situations where it’s so easy for a chain of command to make wrong decisions bringing to heinous crimes, such as the deliberated murder of unarmed journalists. It’s not a private affair. It is a different matter. It’s not about fighting each other. Like enemies. It’s about protecting people. All the people. Like the ones Andy depicted in his images. Donbass’ people. Now that we are shaping together the Europe of the future, please help us defend the primacy of justice over political barricades.

In the court hearing taking place on october 15th state attorney Nunzia Ciaravolo and all plaintiffs held their speeches.Furthermore, a non-ritual communication was inserted into the bulky dossier of the process: an email sent by Andrey Mironov’s brother and friends, containing their claims to be invited to the process.
The speech held by the state attorney substantially confirmed the reasons stated by the court of justice in Pavia and outlined the whole investigation path:

– William’s witness statement and the sequence of events leading to the double murder;
– the equipment at disposal of the Ukrainian army; how mortars function, shooting range and targeting distance;
– place occupied by Markiv on Karachun hill and his role within the Ukrainian National Guard;
– statements released by the Ukrainian soldiers who came to testify at the 1st grade of process. Hierarchy and organization of the UNG;
– scarce collaboration of the Ukrainian authorities.The speech covered all topics relevant to the case with the support of pictures, videos and geo-location.

To give a better understanding of the contest where Mr Markiv voluntarily served as soldier, state attorney Ciaravolo showed the pictures of tortures, intimidations and violences found in Markiv’s phone and usb stick at the moment of his arrest. She also stressed how “justice shall not take anybody’s side in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and that its geo-political features shall stay outside of the court room”.
In the afternoon, lawyers Ballerini, Tambuscio, Tizzoni and Pisapia spoke, covering extra topics. Lawyer Ballerini firmly stated as the docu-film “The Wrong Place” can’t be taken in consideration as a reliable source for the process.