The prosecutor in the trial of two police officers accused of raping a 19-year-old woman inside the Omonia Police Station in Athens in October 2022 has recommended their acquittal on the rape charge on the grounds of reasonable doubt.

The case, which has been heard before the Mixed Jury Court since February, concerns two officers who were serving with the DI.AS. motorcycle police unit at the time. They are accused of jointly raping the young woman while on duty. One of them also faces a charge of violating personal data laws, while a third police officer, their superior, is on trial for alleged complicity.

In his closing argument, the prosecutor said the evidence had not conclusively established that the complainant had not consented. He argued that her testimony contained, in his view, contradictions and gaps concerning the events of that night.

“The defendants’ conduct was reprehensible and highly unprofessional, but we are not a court of ethics,” the prosecutor said, stressing that criminal responsibility must be based on evidence rather than moral judgment.

According to the prosecutor, the evidence in the case file did not lead with certainty to the conclusion that rape had taken place. He said it left open the possibility of a consensual encounter that the complainant later regretted.

“We do not have rape. We have a sexual encounter, and afterward one party regretted it. This is a version of events that must be examined by the court,” he said, referring, among other evidence, to video footage included in the case file.

At the same time, the prosecutor strongly criticised the behaviour of the two accused officers. He said they had “desecrated the national emblem,” failed to show respect toward the complainant, and exploited their official capacity in a way that was unacceptable, particularly given that the incident allegedly took place inside a police station and while they were on duty.

Even if the acts were consensual, he said, the officers had a duty to uphold the integrity of their service. However, he argued that such conduct falls within the scope of disciplinary responsibility rather than criminal liability.

Referring to the issue of consent, the prosecutor said the complainant’s behaviour, as presented during the evidentiary proceedings, did not, in his assessment, correspond to that of a person subjected to police violence. He noted that she did not leave the premises when, according to her own testimony, she was left alone, nor did she call for help, although the room where the alleged assault took place was next to the domestic violence office.

“Based on the evidence presented to the court, I cannot conclude with certainty that there was a lack of consent. That must be proven,” he said.

The prosecutor also argued that, had the defendants intended to commit rape, they would have been unlikely to choose a location such as the Omonia Police Station, which was particularly busy at the time. The remark caused strong reactions in the courtroom, with members of the audience shouting “Shame on you.”

On the separate charge of violating personal data laws, the prosecutor recommended that the second defendant be found guilty, saying he had assured the complainant that he had not stored the relevant video footage, while the indictment states that he had retained it.

As for the third defendant, who is accused of aiding and abetting, the prosecutor said there was no evidence of intent regarding the assistance he allegedly provided to his co-defendants and asked for his acquittal on the grounds of reasonable doubt.

Concluding his argument, the prosecutor repeated that the conduct of the two officers was “reprehensible” and “highly unprofessional.” However, he said that “people are convicted on the basis of evidence, not moral judgments,” and asked the court to acquit them of the rape charge due to reasonable doubt.

What the defendants have argued

In their defence statements at a previous hearing, the two accused police officers said the encounter with the 19-year-old woman in the locker room of the Omonia Police Station had been consensual.

They denied the rape charge and described what happened as a “mistake” and an act of “carelessness,” saying they regretted it the same day. The third defendant said he could never have imagined that his subordinates would engage in such conduct, particularly inside a police station. He added that, had he known what was happening, he would not only have stopped them but would have arrested them.

The complainant, however, has maintained in her court testimony that on the night of October 11, 2022, she approached the accused officers while they were on patrol in Thiseio to ask for help with a problem at the restaurant where she worked. According to her testimony, they told her they did not know how to deal with the matter and suggested that she go to the duty officer at the Omonia Police Station.

She testified that, once they arrived there, two of the officers led her into the locker room, where she says she was raped, while one of them recorded the incident.

The trial is continuing, with defence lawyers presenting their arguments before the court.