“I’ve heard a lot of comments that are general, political. That doesn’t matter; what matters is the legal part of this case,” said Georgian Public Defender Levan Ioseliani.

According to Ioseliani, the court should examine all evidence when making a verdict.

“I’ve heard a lot of comments that are general, political. That doesn’t matter; what matters is the legal part of this case. Did Paata Manjgaladze organize violence, and is there evidence to confirm that? Some may like or dislike Manjgaladze.

In the Amicus Curiae I presented to the court, it is written that the case which we have studied and the evidence which we examined, gives no ground to say affirmatively that Paata Manjgaladze organized violence or was a co-organiser of the crime. We could not trace such evidence, and therefore, we said that the court should consider that circumstance.

In our opinion, he did not commit the act provided for in this article. I cannot predict which decision the court will make. It is significant that all evidence is assessed and examined before the verdict.

This is a serious article; a person faces up to nine years in prison, and it is important that in such a case, and not only in this case, but in all other cases, the verdict be supported by evidence,” he said.