After the incident, he called defendant 1 and asked if he had heard anything new or if anyone had spoken about the incident, and he answered in the negative; and later he went to a party on behalf of the work in order to disconnect and forget about everything (pp. 461, 494). Regarding the conversation with his girlfriend Sally at the party, defendant 2 claimed that he did not remember what he was talking to her, it was under the influence of drugs and alcohol and "nonsense was said" (p. 464).
With regard to the telephone conversation between him and Defendant 1 prior to the incident, Defendant 2 claimed that he had called Defendant 1 in order to find out details about the deceased, to understand if he was a dangerous person and to inquire about his family so that he would not contact them and tell them that the drugs had been stolen from him and that they would harm them, as part of his concerns about the matter; and he rejected the claim that this conversation attested to prior planning (pp. 461-464, 481). Regarding the claim that they planned to meet with the deceased in a quiet place, arrived at the meeting without phones and changed clothes, as part of the preliminary planning, he replied that he arrived without a phone because he did not have a battery and therefore his phone remained in the apartment of defendant 1; and that he came to the house of defendant 1 dressed in clothes for the "going out", and changed into the clothes that defendant 1 had given him because "I went to a place in the forest with black clothes, so that they would not know who I was." Later he confirmed that he had brought a bag with clothes with him to the house of defendant 1 because he was supposed to stay with him, and claimed that they had been changed to black clothes in order to threaten the deceased (pp. 478-479, 483).
Defendant 2 further claimed that after a representative of the Central Intelligence Unit arrived at his home and informed his parents that he was being summoned for interrogation, his parents picked him up from work and drove him to the police station, where he was initially interrogated on suspicion of drug trafficking; When he was asked during the interrogation whether he wanted to consult a lawyer, he asked the interrogator why he needed a lawyer, and he replied that it was a minor matter and that he did not need a lawyer. At the end of the interrogation, he was told to wait in the hallway, and at that point another interrogator approached him and told him that he was in trouble, asked him to accompany him to the room, and there, in the presence of two other interrogators, he told him that Defendant 1 had told them everything, that they knew that it was a murder and that he was going to prison for life; Afterwards, the commander of the Central Intelligence Unit entered the room, told him that they knew everything, that he should say that Defendant 1 had done everything, dragged him and that he had no choice but to find himself in a situation with no other choice, and promised him that if he said so he would be able to go home, which he did (pp. 466-464).