Greek actor Petros Filippidis found innocent of serial rape

Prosecutor Stella Stoya requested the acquittal of Petros Filippidis for repeated rape from the Mixed Jury Court.

Not guilty of rape

“Assessing all the evidence, I am unable to conclude what exactly happened. I have doubts. The events may have happened as the complainant tells the court, but the court cannot convict with doubts. The differences in the statements of the first complainant are not details. There are doubts about what exactly happened,” the prosecutor emphasized in her statement, concluding the first chapter that referred to the committed criminal act included in the indictment for Petros Filippidis.

The public prosecutor weighed that in the first complainant’s statements there are different versions and variations which she described.

“In questions to the complainant about the differences that exist in her statements, she claimed: “It was all in a dark room. When Panagiotis (her friend) reminded me of them, it was as if he opened that door.”

“The complainant presented a different description of the events in three different institutions. One to the Actors Guild, one to the prosecutor, one to the interrogation. Why didn’t she tell the prosecutor what she told the investigator. The complainant came to the public prosecutor to report what she suffered, not to characterize it legally. She reports such a serious event to the investigator for the first time. If she had filed it with the public prosecutor I would have taken a different position, accepting that she wanted to file a complaint with the Actors Guild. But she discovered something new at each subsequent stage.”

These differences created questions for the prosecutor.

“I was impressed that on a request for a reenactment the first complainant said: “I will accept representation if he does it himself. Can he?”.

Afterwards, she said that it was humor and irony and that she consideredto say  it anachronistic. “But allow me that you can’t have humor with your rapist. The victim’s behavior will also be assessed. The victim is not apologizing for her behavior, but her testimony is being evaluated.”

Guilty of first attempted rape

Afterwards, the public prosecutor proposed the guilt of Petros Filippidis for the attempted rape against the second complainant.

According to the evaluation of the evidence, the defendant stopped the second act attributed to him and did not complete it, because he lost his temper and not of his own volition. “I consider that the circumstances that took place are as described by the complainant in all her statements. The defense and the accused tried to convince with side arguments, while the accused claimed that their meeting was consensual” said the prosecutor.

And she added that she accepted that she was responding to the defendant’s prompts and said so herself, although she could have avoided doing so, because she is testifying the whole truth.

According to the prosecutor, the girl “then did not have the clarity to think rationally… Today she would not feel afraid and abandoned. Back then, psychology was fragile. She was scared, she felt threatened by the accused and that is why she was replying to the messages. She was a mental hostage. The idea of the threat had grown in her mind. The all-powerful rapist frightened and dominated her. The girl was shaking and crying here . The accused listened to her embarrassed” she continued in an aside of her speechdisgust of her husband.

And she added that “then she felt that if she denounced it, no one would believe her but they would believe the mighty Filippidis, who would say that she did this to become known professionally. She has done it now to restore order.”

Also guilty of the second attempted rape

The prosecutor also requested the actor’s guilt for the second rape attempt against his colleague in 2014 in his car in Paleo Psychiko.

“The complainant during her testimony had a crisis at the time. She was acting wild and trying to prevent the accused from his criminal plan, which was to perform fellatio. In her panic she had the impression that the door was locked. It’s that moment when you say I didn’t do it! Why didn’t I try to openthe door? And you castigate yourself’ she testified to us here in court.

The defendant’s position against the accusation is that there was an erotic mood. If it was consensual why didn’t he seek her out later? Why doesn’t she seek to meet him again? There was talk of her diary. The defense asked how it was possible that she didn’t write something about what had happened to her? And why write? Why would she record something horrible that happened to her. The pages on those days are blank. That is also indicative,” concluded the prosecutor.