3 convicted in absentia for 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines jet over Ukraine

So typical of a NATO-style court. They turned the whole event into a political farce rather than any kind of serious investigation. The most important thing is that these dirty fascists never get their grubby little hands on the 3 who were convicted.

“What matters to me is that the truth is revealed. It’s important for me that my country is not blamed for this tragedy.”

These are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

The biased course of the MH17 process in The Hague was resisted by Malaysia. It was a Malaysian Boeing. And most importantly, what confuses them: where is the American data. Everyone knows - and we know, and they themselves said - that at that moment their satellites were over the territory of Ukraine. Well, where is this data? Everyone also knows, including the court, who was flying the plane. It was the Dnepropetrovsk communication center. Why did controllers bring the plane into the war zone? Who owned this point of contact?

Senior DPR rep from that time

DPR? What's that? Did you miss out the K?

DPR? What's that? Did you miss out the K?

Serious? Donetsk People's Republic

Yes, serious. It's not easy to keep up with all these acronyms. I am not well versed in sham "republics." Sorry for my ignorance.

This is part of Russia's Big Lie, about the "poor Ukrainian separatists" when it was really the Russian army all along, organizing, funding arming, training and even in later portions fighting for them.

This is their justification for the 2022 full invasion, that Ukraine tried to defend itself from the covert invasion of 2014.

Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said evidence presented by prosecutors in the trial — which lasted more than two years — proved that the Boeing 777 was brought down by a Buk missile fired by pro-Moscow Ukrainian fighters on July 17, 2014. The crash scattered wreckage and bodies over farmland and fields of sunflowers.

I didn't know that was even seriously contested by anyone. The main line of defense from Russia and DPR was that the Buk rocket was launched by the Ukrainian forces (a pretty transparent lie).

How we appeased Russia.

Russia invaded Chechnya, appeasement.

russia attacked Georgia, 2008 appeasement.

Russia invaded Crimea, appeasement. Russia invaded the Donbas region, appeasement.

Russia shoots down an airliner, appeasement.

Russia uses chemical weapons

in the Uk.appeasement.

russia used nuclear poison in the UK. Appeasement.

Russia invades Ukraine…….. we can’t appease a bully, because eventually they want just a little bit more.

Are we seeing a pattern.

Life in prison for three of them but won't serve anytime while they remain in Russia.

Hey what do you know? The Russians actually did it. What a surprise.

Thank you (no, actually thank you) to the court for proving what we all already knew: The Russians are responsible and are shielding the guilty from accountability.

Whether the guilty will ever be held to account is unknown.

But the Russians are not walking away from this. They encouraged the war. They supplied the weapons. They covered up and in fact intentionally decieved the international community.

And we all know it.

They should execute these three clowns by throwing them out of a plane at 10,000 feet so they can experience what it felt like for the 298 people they murdered.

Another politically motivated court case from the Netherlands, just like Lockerbie...

All just theater, verdict predetermined. Russia is the new Libya.

If anyone followed the Lockerbie trial and what we now know after they will see a very obvious correlation with this show trial.

They even had one of the defendants acquitted...... Just like Lockerbie..... Showing the prosecutions version of events was not true but delivering the "correct" verdict.

were convicted for their role in bringing the Buk missile system from a Russian military base into Ukraine and putting it into position for its launch

Is that all they were convicted of, or did they actually fire the missile?

Russia, guilty as charged. Not really a surprise to anyone. Investigations that ran for years to ensure they get all the evidence correct. Investigators from multiple nations involved in the gathering of the evidence.

Russia must now pay adequate compensation to the families of the deceased and make a public apology for its wrong doing and coverup.

Russia has been found guilty and will continue to deny and to not pay compensation. That is the Russian way.

Interpol needs to extract these convicted criminals to imprison them for life. With or without Russian permission.

This is part of Russia's Big Lie, about the "poor Ukrainian separatists" when it was really the Russian army all along, organizing, funding arming, training and even in later portions fighting for them.

Here's the problem; if this is true, it also means that the 3 Russians should be entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions and treated as lawful combatants. They can be charged with war crimes, but not ordinary civilian crimes in the Netherlands. The fact that they weren't charged properly seems to be a political decision. The Dutch prosecutors have played a cynical game where they've exploited the fact that these men will never be allowed to show up and raise this obvious defence because it contradicts the official Russian position on non-involvement in Ukraine. Like most trials in absentia, this was a political excercise, a literal show trial.

Russia has been found guilty and will continue to deny and to not pay compensation. That is the Russian way.

No. Russia was not even on trial. Certain Russian individuals were.

@mrukiplinqRussia is the new Libya

Russian forces are in Libya now like cultures cleaning up the remains of Libya, trying to increase the Kremlin's hold on the world's oil and gas. But the Wagners and their ilk have not yet succeeded in making the 'new Libya' Russian. Other vulture oil states and corporations also have their vulture armies in Libya.

Well there's three people who will never ever set foot in the Netherlands, or likely any country that has an extradition treaty with it.

Igor Girkin, aka Strelkov commented on the sentence handed down against him by the District Court of The Hague with a quote from the writings of Tsar Ivan IV Grozny:

“And if you, having a dog's mouth, want to bark for fun—that's your custom as a serf: it is an honor to you, but it is disgrace for us to think of you, let alone to snarl back at you, and there is naught worse in this world than to bark along with you, and if you want to bark, find yourself a serf like you, and bark with him,”

Even if we accept that the missile was Russian, transported from Russia, and fired by DPR forces, the court's decision to deny combatant immunity seems questionable.

This is a translation from the court's own case summary. (Bolding is mine):

The court has established that from April 2014 there was an armed conflict between the Ukrainian army and separatist groups. One of those groups fought under the name Donetsk People's Republic (DPR).

*It follows from an abundance of indications that from mid-May 2014 the DPR was actually controlled from the Russian Federation. As a result, the Russian Federation has become so involved in the conflict with Ukraine that it has become an international conflict. In an international conflict, the use of a weapon may be permitted under certain circumstances. Soldiers of those countries can then invoke immunity (combatant immunity) and not be prosecuted under criminal law. But because the Russian Federation and the suspects to this day deny any Russian involvement, the fighters of the DPR cannot be seen as part of the Russian armed forces. *They cannot then be granted immunity from prosecution

The court decided:

Russia was so involved with the DPR that this became an international armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

It acknowledged that, normally, combatants would be immune from this sort of criminal prosecution.

But because Russia still denies any involvement with the DPR, and the accused also deny Russian involvement (perhaps for their own safety?), the court will just refuse to grant the immunity. This despite the court just ruling that the DPR was in fact controlled by Russia, and even though the Geneva Convention doesn't specify any formal requirements before someone should be deemed a lawful combatant.

This seems bizarrely inconsistent. Clearly, the immunity should depend on the factual circumstances on the ground at the time, not on whether one of the parties to the conflict now refuses to admit involvement in the war. If Russia finally admits to involvement with the DPR in 5 or 10 years, will the court revisit the immunity issue and overturn all of these convictions? If Russia then retracts that admission, will the convictions be reinstated? What form would this admission have to take to satisfy the court?

Whoever thinks this so-called "court" is tasked with finding the perpetrator really needs to improve their critical thinking skills.

Just blindly blame it on the Russians like the Polish missile thing. Laughable.