Here are my questions:
1) Why is she being held illegally in Russia?
2) Since she committed no crime in Russia where does Russia get off trying her for a “crime” supposedly committed in Ukraine?
3) She is a military officer and was seized in uniform by Russian regulars and pro-Russian irregulars. Where in law do they have the authority to send her to a foreign country?
4) Is she being tried by a military court? After all she is a military officer and was seized in uniform and during combat?
5) The two “reporters” were killed in a mortar attack on a rebel checkpoint. How is being unfortunate enough to get yourself killed in combat in a war zone while hanging out with rebels a crime on her part?
6) If the billing data from her phone is correct - and it is because how could it not be - then she was seized one hour before the mortar attack so why is she under arrest then?
7) Why are the Russian lying and saying she voluntarily crossed the border as a refugee when they earlier reported they had captured her?
8) Why are the Russians resorting to their old commie trick of sending people who oppose them for “forensic psychological” stays in mental hospitals with this woman?
9) If they believed she needed a month long stay in a mental hospital, how could they turn around and assume or pretend she was competent for trial?
10) Why does the official Russian investigation report claim she voluntarily walked across the border - which makes no sense to anyone - when the Donetsk rebel entity said the exact opposite was the case from the very beginning? Who’s more trustworthy - those who did the capturing and delivering over to Russia of this woman AND ADMITTED IT FROM THE BEGINNING of the lying sack-o-crap Russians who had to back falsify their own official statements and media reports after the fact?
You tell me since you’re such an expert on the case.
Thank you. Your questions, with answers obvious to all, is a testimony how the Putin’s regime has lost all contact with reality.
Soon, no trace of them will remain.
1. Not supported by your evidence.
2. Many countries, including the US, permit the criminal prosecution of attacks against their citizens on foreign soil.
3. Ever hear of ‘rendition’? Ever hear of Eichmann? And have you ever heard of Adolf Eichmann?
4. Would you really prefer her to have been tried by a more efficient court martial where she wouldn’t have had a platform for her posturing?
5. In the statement here, she seems to be targeting for the content of their reporting. “They are guilty of lying and of providing false, distorted information regarding events in Ukraine, the world, and in Russia.”
6-7 She doesn’t seem to be asserting such claims in her closing statement.
8. You probably need to re-word that one so it makes sense in English.
9. The purpose of a psychiatric evaluation is to determine whether someone is competent for trial. If they are competent, you try them. If they aren’t, they should be treated in an effort to make them competent. This is a separate determination from that as to whether they are not guilty by reason of insanity.
10. She appears to have abandoned any such claims in her closing argument.
By the way - who is George Soros pulling for in the current US elections.