“My first statement was not the truth; the second one is the truth,” the prosecution’s key witness, Yiannis Andreou, also known as “Maronas,” stated on Thursday before the Nicosia Permanent Criminal Court during the retrial of the case against Giorgos Christodoulou Zavrantonas regarding the 15-kilogram cocaine case.

This specific reference was the focus of the witness’s lengthy testimony, during which he was asked to explain the discrepancy between his first statement following his arrest and the second statement he gave to the authorities, on the basis of which he was admitted to the YKAN witness protection program.

Mr. Andreou argued that his first statement did not reflect reality, since, as he stated, he had decided at that time to take responsibility for the case himself, while insisting that his second statement reflects the actual facts.

The retrial is taking place following the Court of Appeals’ decision to overturn the 22-year prison sentence imposed on Giorgos Christodoulou Zavrantonas and to order a new hearing proceedings before the Nicosia Permanent Criminal Court.

Yiannis Andreou is the prosecution’s key witness in the case. He was sentenced in 2019 to 16 years in prison, however, he later gave a new statement to the authorities, entered the witness protection program, and received a presidential pardon, resulting in the suspension of his sentence after he had served approximately three and a half years.

His appearance in court took place under strict security measures. The witness was escorted by police officers, while a heavy police presence was maintained both inside and outside the courtroom.

The first and second testimonies at the center of the proceedings

At the start of the proceedings, Mr. Andreou confirmed that he uses the alias “Maronas.” The representative of the prosecution, Vasilis Bisas, presented him with his first statement and asked him whether he recognized it. The witness answered in the affirmative; however, he clarified that he does not accept it because—as he said—he gave a second statement.

At this point, an objection was raised by the defendant’s defense attorney, Christos Poutziouris, who argued that the prosecution’s question was leading the witness. Following the court’s intervention, the question was rephrased, and Mr. Andreou stated that he did not stand by his first testimony because he had subsequently provided a new one.

The first statement, which was given immediately after his arrest when 15 kilograms of cocaine were found in his possession, was read aloud before the Court.

According to the report, Mr. Andreou appeared at that time to take responsibility for the case, stating that he had become involved due to financial problems he was facing as a result of gambling. He stated that he owed large sums of money, that he and his family were receiving threats, and that he had been forced to transport the drugs.

In the same testimony, he stated that he was in daily contact with Zavrantonas, but denied that the latter had any involvement in the case. At the same time, he maintained that his then-co-defendant, Aristos Kyprianou, was unaware of the drugs.

Subsequently, his second statement was read aloud, which the witness stated he endorsed. In it, Mr. Andreou stated that he had decided to reveal details he had not previously mentioned because he was afraid, but also because he wished to protect a person with whom he had a friendly relationship.

According to his second account, the person who instructed him to pick up the drugs was Giorgos Zavrantonas, whom—as he stated—he had known since 2016. He claimed that after the defendant’s release from prison, they were in daily contact, met frequently, and he himself visited Zavrantonas’s home in Deftera.

As he testified, a few days before his arrest, Zavrantonas traveled to the Netherlands to arrange for the shipment of the cocaine and subsequently contacted him, giving him instructions on how to receive it.

The witness stated that their communications took place mainly through a messaging app and that the defendant contacted him during the pickup, in order to stay informed about the progress of the process.

According to Mr. Andreou, he picked up the drugs from a location where they were hidden under a sign, while Aristos Kyprianou was with him. He claimed that Kyprianou knew nothing about the case and was merely accompanying him.

During his main examination, the witness identified a series of photographs and pieces of evidence related to the case. Among other things, he identified the military-style bag in which the drugs had been placed, photographs of the pickup location, and the vehicles used.

He also mentioned the one kilogram of cocaine that he threw from the balcony of his home when he noticed the presence of police officers. As he stated, while watching the security cameras, he saw two people approaching Aristos Kyprianou and realized they were police officers.

During cross-examination by Zavrantonas’s defense attorney, Christos Poutziouris, the defense focused on contradictions between the witness’s two statements and the reasons that led him to change his account.

The witness was asked to confirm that in 2019 he had admitted to drug possession, possession with intent to distribute, and conspiracy to commit a felony. Mr. Andreou answered in the affirmative.

The defense pointed out that at that time, before the Criminal Court, the position presented was that the drugs belonged to the witness himself and that his current account of events is different.

When asked whether the account presented in 2019 was the truth, Mr. Andreou replied in the negative.

“My first testimony was not the truth; the second one is the truth,” he said, when his defense counsel argued that he had lied before the court. “I decided to take full responsibility in my first testimony,” he added.

The witness denied that he had changed his story to receive favorable treatment from the authorities, saying that he decided to speak out because he wanted to reveal “who the drugs belong to.”

The defense also referred to his inclusion in the witness protection program, the presidential pardon he received, and the suspension of his sentence, arguing that these were the result of an agreement to cooperate with the authorities.

Mr. Andreou rejected the claim, saying that his testimony was the truth and that he could have chosen not to appear in court if he had not wished to testify. “I told the truth, and I’m telling it now, and that’s why I’m here today. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have come,” he said.

Regarding his protection, the witness said that the police have informed him that he is still in danger and that he is staying in Kormakiti because he feels safer there. “Even today, I look you in the eye and tell you that I’m in danger,” he said.

Cross-examination regarding the witness’s prior involvement with drugs

During cross-examination, the defense attorney also referred to allegations concerning the witness’s prior involvement with drugs and his relationships with individuals mentioned during the proceedings.

Mr. Poutziouris asked Mr. Andreou whether he had ever imported drugs. When the question was repeated, Mr. Andreou answered in the affirmative.

When asked when this had happened, the witness replied: “Ask your client; he knows better,” claiming that Zavrantonas was the person who handled such matters.

When asked whether he had mentioned these details to the police or in court before his prison sentence was imposed in 2019, Mr. Andreou replied that he had not been asked about it.

Mr. Poutziouris suggested to the witness that he had presented himself as a drug dealer, to which Mr. Andreou replied that he was his client’s “man.”

Mr. Andreou then spoke about his stay in Kormakiti following his release from prison. When asked when he returned to the area, he stated that this occurred a few days after his release from prison.

The defense asked him whether he was aware that he might be violating the conditions set for his release, to which the witness replied that he did not believe he was violating any condition, as he had returned to his village and it is subject to a different administrative regime.

When asked whether the Legal Service was aware of his stay in Kormakiti, Mr. Andreou replied that he did not know and referred the question to the Legal Service itself, adding that he was not in hiding and that he resides there.

The proceedings will continue tomorrow, Friday, at 9:30 a.m., with the completion of the cross-examination of the witness.

Source: CNA