The video showcasing the behavior of defendant Lilit Vardanyan after the delivery of the judgment is to be examined as data characterizing the defendant in the case of Lia Misakyan’s death18:42, March 21, 2018 | News, Own news | Right to Life | Lia Misakyan
The examination of the case of Lia Misakyan, who died at Arabkir Medical Center in January 2013 at the age of two years and three months, resumed at the Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan on March 16, 2018.
It should be recalled that the previous court hearing had not taken place due to Judge M. Melkonyan moving to the other residence of the Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan. Incidentally, the aggrieved party had not been informed of the court hearing not being held.
Karen Mezhlumyan was involved as the defender of defendant Z. Ayvazyan at the court hearing held on March 16. The other defendant L. Vardanyan and her defender Givi Hovhannisyan and Tatevik Siradeghyan, who is the representative of the legal successor of the victim and a lawyer at the representative office of HCA Vanadzor in Yerevan, were also present at the court hearing.
After presenting the case being examined in regard to imposing additional punishment following the overturn of the Cassation Court, Judge M. Melkonyan carried on to examine the data characterizing the defendants’ personality.
The defendants’ testimonials, the request by the director of Arabkir Medical Center on not imposing additional punishment and the certificates of appreciation awarded to Z. Ayvazyan were made public.
Tatevik Siradeghyan, the representative of Lia Misakyan’s legal successor, filed a motion to examine as data characterizing personality the mass media publications and the video showcasing defendant L. Vardanyan’s behavior in the courtroom after the rendering of the judgment on June 15, 2015.
Despite the objections by L. Vardanyan’s defender, stating that L. Vardanyan had uttered those expressions in conditions of mental strain, both the prosecuting attorney and the court considered the motion as capable of being upheld.
For technical reasons, it was not possible to examine the video, and the court hearing was adjourned to 3.00 pm on April 12, 2018.