On March 3, the Antiterrorist Unit pigs tasked with watching Haris Hatzimichelakis’ home in September 2009 continued their testimony. This time, it was the turn of G. Mourdoukoutas, who was unable to attend the previous session due to “psychological problems,” and surveillance team leader P. Hinopoulos. Mourdoukoutas is the pig who was arrested a few months ago for attempting to rob a betting parlor, and his testimony was full of contradictions regarding even the most basic description of events, especially as compared to the testimony of his two colleagues. Nevertheless, just like his colleagues, he positively identified Damiano Bolano despite not being able to recognize any of the defendants during prior questioning. Defense attorney Frangiskos Ragousis’ request to initiate an evaluation of Mourdoukoutas’ psychological viability as a witness was rejected by the court, and as Mourdoukoutas left the stand, our four comrade defendants pelted him with a hailstorm of pills.
On March 25, some weeks after his testimony, Mourdoukoutas ran into a further bit of bad luck, which can be read about here.
Hinopoulos was next to testify, and he said that everything he knew was the result of information supplied to him by the team members under his command. Yet, despite none of his subordinates being able recognize any of the defendants during their initial questioning on September 21, 2009, Hinopoulos positively identified Bolano and the Nikolopoulos brothers just a day later, which information he now claims came from “different sources.” When pressed by the defense to name those sources, Hinopoulos said they were none other than Antiterrorist Unit higher-ups D. Horianopoulos and G. Frangiskos, and Ragousis immediately requested that Horianopoulos and Frangiskos be subpoenaed to testify.
The trial was then postponed until March 21.
The March 21 session began with the defendants having an opportunity to question the prosecution’s witnesses. Michalis Nikolopoulos started the proceedings off with the following statement:
Before beginning to question the defendant Hinopoulos, I’m going to explain why we refer to certain witnesses—especially police and politicians—that way, since the same thing also occurred during the previous session. I want to make it clear, given that neither then nor now did it happen inadvertently, accidentally, or by mistake.
Here at this court martial, there are obviously two contradictory poles, two enemy sides. One is yours, that of power and its subjects. The other is that of proud anarchist combatants, people who guide their lives toward the rough pathways of anarchist revolution.
According to your authoritarian system, you say that we are the defendants. We are telling you that, in the war we have declared, we are guilty. Guilty in the face of your interests. Guilty in the face of your bosses, the political system, your power. Guilty in the face of the police, in the face of the values you produce and defend through your bourgeois legality.
But you must know that, to us, you are the defendants. You are the defendants because you oppose rebellious people. Because you do everything possible to protect your bosses. Because you uphold the social values of submission, consumerism, egoism, misery, and acceptance. Because you will always do what your superiors command. Because you, quite simply, have chosen your side. Because you are enemies of anarchist revolution.
You must know that, in addition to being defendants, you are also guilty. You must know that there will come a day when our revolutionary councils will determine your sentences.
That, of course, should be passed on to Horianopoulos, Syros, Tzoitis, Papathanasakis, and all the rest who were or are part of the Antiterrorist Unit.
Further questioning of Hinopoulos by Michalis Nikolopoulos and Christos Tsakalos only yielded more confused, contradictory responses, and led defense attorneys H. Sipsas and Ifigenia Karandrea to add their support to Ragousis’ request to subpoena Antiterrorist Unit bigwigs Horianopoulos and Frangiskos, who Hinopoulos says are in charge of the entire “anti-Fire Cells Conspiracy project.”
Tsakalos then read a statement in the name of the entire Fire Cells Conspiracy organization, a complete English translation of which can be found here.
Next to testify were five witnesses (one of whom is a police officer) to the Fire Cells Conpiracy attack on the apartment of Panayiotis Hinofotis, who was interior minister at the time. Their testimony was also so riddled with inconsistencies and defendant misidentification that, in order to stave off further embarrassment, the presiding magistrate didn’t even bother to question all five of them.
Finally, after a heated incident involving a guard who wanted to search Bolano’s girlfriend and her handbag, the courtroom was cleared and the trial postponed until Monday, March 26.