The Court of Appeal has upheld the detention of a man accused of trying to kill his partner, allegedly in the presence of her child, ruling that he remains a flight risk despite his ties to Cyprus.
The court overturned the part of the lower court’s decision based on the risk of witness interference, finding there was not enough evidence to support it. The man had appealed against the lower court’s order to keep him in custody until he appears before the Nicosia Criminal Court on October 23, and he will remain in custody until then.
He faces charges including the attempted murder of his partner, wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, unlawfully depriving her of her liberty, assault causing actual bodily harm, threatening to kill her on two occasions and psychological violence. He is also accused of violence against the woman’s child, a minor, because the attack allegedly took place in the child’s presence. He is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
The prosecution had sought his detention, citing flight risk, the possibility that he would commit further offences and the risk of witness interference.
Defence arguments
In his appeal, the man argued among other things that he has lived in Cyprus for the past 24 years, since he was five, that he went to school and finished secondary school in Cyprus, and that he speaks fluent Greek. He said he has a job and that his employer had offered him a flat so that he could move out of the home he had shared with the complainant. If released, he would return to work, the defence said.
The complainant’s stance
The defence also cited statements by the complainant in which she allegedly said she had no complaint against him, did not want him prosecuted and did not intend to testify against him.
The Court of Appeal found that these statements did not cancel out her original allegations, which had not been withdrawn. Questions about the complainant’s stance would be decided at trial and could not determine the detention decision at this stage, it said.
Flight risk
The court found that the lower court had correctly assessed the seriousness of the offences, the possible sentences on conviction and the likelihood of conviction, based on the evidence available. The lower court had also taken into account the man’s personal ties to Cyprus, and concluded that they were not enough to remove the risk that he would not appear for his trial.
Pre-trial detention is an exceptional measure, with personal liberty as the starting point, the court said, but personal circumstances must be weighed against the seriousness of the case and the risk that a defendant will not appear in court.
Witness interference
The court upheld the appeal on the risk of witness interference. It found that although the prosecution had mentioned the risk in its original application, it had not argued it in any substance before the lower court. The prosecution’s reference to it had been limited to the possibility that the complainant could be threatened into dropping her complaint.
Any finding of a risk of witness interference must rest on specific evidence and circumstances, not on general or theoretical assumptions, the court said. Neither the complainant’s later stance nor the message referred to in court, in which the man told her he had left the home, was enough on its own to establish such a risk.
The ruling by judges M. Ambiza, St. Christodoulidou-Messiou and I. Stylianidou was unanimous.
