Thread by @HRIMark

Prosecution: Not giving another complete overview but will be repeating things to drum home the key points for the benefit of the public.

Prosecution: Showing field where BUK allegedly fired

Prosecution arguing witness X48 statement and satellite analysis come up with similar locations

Prosecution: Re One of the pieces of dashcam footages of the BUK Telar this was extensively investigated including original card etc (Prosecution doesn't mention missing film from Lugansk BUK camera).

HRI comment - the prosecution is trying to paint a picture of complete forensic evidence - but that only applies to one piece of footage & they are deflecting from the missing footage from Ukraine security cameras.

HRI comment - the prosecution is also trying to deflect from the absence of satellite imagery from the USA by emphasising the relatively unimportant imagery from Europe.

Prosecution making a big deal of dashcam match with Geoserve satellite imagery which the judges obviously didn't think particularly worthy of note.

Prosecution: Defendants were part of group trying to bring down aircraft. (AKA as air defence).

Prosecution: Wants to bring attention of court to certain conversations (not the fact that the SBU clearly knew everything about the BUK but did nothing to impede its progress at any point).

Prosecution is playing various conversations from 16th about downing of UKR jets. HRI note: On 16th there was a mysterious crash landing at airfield used by US - not being mentioned by prosecution.

Prosecution: According to Ukrainian documents there was no flight by Ukrainian aircraft over the area.

Prosecution: No wreckage investigations have found parts of aircraft other than MH17.

Prosecution: Witnesses state the separatists thought they had downed a transport aircraft or a Sushka jet but then were devastated to realise it was a civilian aircraft.

The prosecution is back to continue to strengthen their narrative with somewhat specious arguments, which may sound convincing to the public but have already been deemed not worthy of emphasis by the judges.

Prosecution: Going to focus on alleged SBU interceptions of Pulatov conversations to see if he was using disinformation in them.

Prosecution: Pulatov has said he never spoke to anyone about a BUK system on 16th or 17th. Anything idiotic eg about BUK was disinformation.

Prosecution: But alleged conversations include separatists saying they need a BUK due to losses from Ukrainian air attacks, talking about "our BUK" downing Sushka & missing meeting point.

The prosecution is using published interview with Pulatov & defence lawyer against him, suggesting his theories as to reasons behind conversations don't match details of alleged conversations.

Prosecution: Interceptions suggest Strela-10 out of action on 16th & being repaired on 17th. Many killed and injured from air attacks. No APCs available due to air attacks.

Prosecution: Girkin-used account on Strela 10

Prosecution: Shows video of pro-Russians in East Ukraine apparently under air attack, including injuries and deaths.

Prosecution: Video is believed to be from Marinovka on 16th July. LifeNews video, also from same area, shows reporter saying Sushkas overhead. Girkin LifeNews video from same area describing fighting.

Prosecution: Interceptions on 17th July

Prosecution: Conversations of 17th include reference to BUK-M

Prosecution: Bellingcat reports Russian artillery fired into Ukraine.

Prosecution: This is relevant as possible artillery fire from Russia discussed in alleged conversations.

Prosecution: 17th July am video evidence of "Vostok convoy" in Makeevka. This also matches with alleged conversation intercepted by SBU.

After the massive revelation that some of the SBU intercepts appear to relate to things that happened in real life, there will now be a lunch break.

Prosecution plays interesting conversation of 19th when Dubinsky asks if any of those guarding the "toy" defected.

Prosecution plays conversations showing Dubinsky, Pulatov etc didn't really know what was going on (eg think Sushka was shot down) and these conversations match with mast data.

Prosecution: Will now present more evidence against Girkin.

Prosecution: Girkin asked for decent Anti-Aircraft defences. 17th July am Dubinsky & Girkin together. Probably Kharchenko also in DPR building in Donetsk.

Prosecution: Pulatov also probably there.

Prosecution: Actions of Girkin's role in removing BUK also relevant. Multiple conversations in early morning. Girkin angry.

Prosecution: Attempts to play Girkin call but technical failure means this potentially crucial call isn't played in its entirety.

Prosecution: Meeting in Snizhne. More evidence of total penetration of separatist comms and Girkin suspicious that some of the separatists are working for other side.

Prosecution plays interception where one of the separatists asks if it is possible they have been framed in the worst possible way.

Other separatist says no - Strelkov has BUK.

Prosecution: One of separatists says if Strelkov did do it he'd be sacked. Strelkov was sacked. QED. With that the prosecution wrap up their "evidence."