Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
The judge is very attentive, very involved,
and the sides also exchange remarks
with each other very actively in this trial.
Your impressions: How is Platon Leonidovich working?
How are the witness and the prosecutor working?
Correlation?
That was not a witness but an expert,
and that was a days-long interrogation.
As I understand,
the expert was not always up to par
he had to ask for questions to be repeated to him
he had to cite poor memory.
As for the defense and Mr. Lebedev,
their questions looked very precise to me.
. In fact, they attacked the expert conclusion
not only content-wise but also questioning the expert's competence
and his being unbiased.
In addition, they know well the legislation of the 1990s
and try to make a distinction between the actions
prescribed by law
and those left to the discretion of the sides.
In addition, contradictions between federal legislation
and international standards of evaluation are put into play here.
Thus, the position of the defense
looks grounded enough.
As for the prosecution,
this is a witness for the prosecution,
and of course they try to defend the expert.
For that, they ask the judge to remove certain questions,
and the judge did consider some questions irrelevant.
So, the sides are working,
and the trial is progressing.
As a professional,
do you think those questions were removed correctly?
I think that the judge
has the right to organize his trial
and take care of its direction.
In this case, the judge removed questions
that he considered irrelevant to the case.
For example, the question on where the expert works
and what his job is about.
The judge considered his job functions irrelevant
to proving the case.
The judge removed the question asked by Mr. Lebedev
on whether or not the investigator had prompted the expert
on certain methods of expert assessment and moves.
I am not sure that this is irrelevant to the case,
but maybe at this stage
the judge had some considerations of his own.
The question of the influence
that the investigation may exercise on expert assessment
is entirely relevant,
and maybe it will be raised later.