Ara Karapetian denies his involvement in robbery of Armen
Avetisian's house
15-07-2010 14:00:00 | Armenia | Social
YEREVAN, JULY 15, NOYAN TAPAN. The accused Ara Karapetian
gave testimony at the July 13 court sitting on the case of the
robbery of the house of Armen Avetisian, former chairman of the
State Customs Committee of Armenia.
According to the indictment, A. Karapetian and former
deputy chief of the police unit in Soviet district of Yerevan
Armen Nikoghosian organized a criminal group to commit various
crimes. "I have not committed any crime and I do not plead
guilty," A. Karapetian said, adding that he has no relation to
thefts of jewelry in U.S. shops. In his words, he appeared in
this case only because by some concurrence of circumstances he
got 45 million drams worth of goods stolen from A. Avetisian's
house and he returned those goods to A. Avetisian through a
mediator.
Karapetian considered the charge brought against him as
trumped-up. "Maybe I or my business bothered some people, I
don’t know," said the accused who owns "As" supermarket and "The
City of Footwear" shop in Yerevan. He noted that he was a
successful businessman in both the U.S. and Yerevan, in
particular, a monthly income of $82 thousand was his worst index
in Yerevan, and in the period of September 2007 to September
2009 he paid about $1 million in taxes to the state budget.
He said that the case investigated by the investigation
department of the National Security Service is full of evidences
which contradict each other and logic, but the investigation
body did not consider it necessary to question the persons to
have given contradictory testimonies by confronting them with
each other. In the words of A. Karapetian, the 12-volume case
has no single line that can prove his guilt as an organizer.
He declared that in conducting an investigation into his
case, the investigation body violated Articles 20, 21 and 22 of
the Constitution, that is, the articles related to the right to
have a defense lawyer at one’s choice, the principle of
presumption of innocence, and the use of evidence obtained in
violation of the law.