Analysis of Appeal Decision

We still waiting for a proper analysis of the appeal decision but basically it rejects the appeal because, for most points, their opinion was that the trial judge had the right to decide what he did.

They rejected our prime witness (Connie K) because even though the judge made up her relationship to Seraphim she was still a close friend – and in their opinion that could mean she either lied or remembered things incorrectly.

And the new evidence – the photographs – were not properly authenticated and they didn’t see the value in them.
If they were accepted it validates another witness who was rejected because he appeared on the scene after the alleged events according to the original time line of events.

Article on Unreliability of Memory in Testimonies
We enclose here the link to the article on how undependable memories are.
Doesn’t help anyone now but gives us better perspective on why these accusations were made and how they are so false to the character of Archbishop Seraphim.

Study shows how easily false memories – even of crimes – can be implanted
By Douglas Quan February 3, 2015
Canadian and British researchers have released the results of a groundbreaking study showing how easily people can be manipulated into thinking they committed crimes when they were younger, even if they are innocent.
....
Please read more