PRESS RELEASE James Ricketson 15th June 2018 Subject: Espionage Trial I have not been served with a citation or summons notifying me that I am to stand trial today on charges of espionage. I have not been notified by investigating judge Pich Vicheathor that I have been indicted to stand trial on espionage charges. I only learned last Friday, 8th June that I was due in court on the 15th of June; today. On Tuesday 12th June I received a translation of prosecutor Seang Sok’s recommendation to Judge Pich Vicheathor regarding my case. This document does not reveal whether I have been indicted or not. In accordance with Cambodian Law it is the investigating judge, not the prosecutor, who decides whether or not an accused person is to be indicted. Prosecutor Seang Sok’s “Absolutely Conclusion” document is little more than the “Police Synthesis” report written on 6th June 2017, with a reference to 25 emails added. Not one of these 25 emails contains any evidence at all that I have engaged in espionage. The contents of these emails are available to the media for independent scrutiny. The attached documents, lodged with the court, outline some of the reasons, in addition to those mentioned above, why I am seeking an adjournment of 4 weeks from the time that the prosecution presents me with evidence that I have committed a crime. No such evidence has been presented to me in the past year, during which I have been interrogated at least 12 times. I have still not been informed which country I have allegedly been spying for this past 23 years. Given that my first three trips to Cambodia were financed, indirectly, (through the ABC and AFC) I have to presume that Australia is my alleged spy master. I will call a representative of DFAT to testify in my trial in relation to this question. Given that my name and face have been used in government propaganda broadcast on TV implicating me in a conspiracy, along with CNRP and The United States, to foment a “Colour Revolution”, I will also be calling upon a representative of the United States Government to testify in my trial. Article 246 outlines the role played by the prosecutor during a pretrial investigation: “The prosecutor will issue a written final submission with a statement of reasons if he agrees with the investigating judge that the investigation is terminated. The Prosecutor may request the investigating Judge to issue and indictment against the charged person or to issue a non-suit order” Prosecutor Sean Sok’s “Absolutely conclusion” is a recommendation only to the investigating Judge The investigating Judge is under no legal obligation to follow the recommendation of the prosecutor. See article #247, Code of Criminal Procedure: “The investigating Judge terminates the judicial investigation by a closing order. The order may be an indictment or a non-suit order… the order shall state the facts being charged and their Legal qualification…. A closing order shall always be supported by a statement of reasons… the Royal Prosecutor (and) the charged person shall be informed of the closing order without delay” I have not, as of 15th June, been provided with a copy of Judge Pic Vicheathor’s closing order and so am unaware of the facts contained in it. With no knowledge of these facts, it is no possible for me to form a defense. The same applies the the reasons contained in Judge Pich Vicheathor’s Statement of Reasons. As of today, 15th June, I have no idea if, in accordance with Cambodian Law, Judge Pich Vicheathor has indicted me to stand trial or if he has issued a non-suit order Pursuant to article #307 of the Criminal Code I request that the court release me: “an accused who is in detention may request the court to release…orally..” James Ricketson, 15 June 2018