Censor.NET reports citing Australia's ABC quoting London lawyer Samuel Wordsworth who defends Russia against Ukraine in the International Court of Justice.
Wordsworth did not run the normal Kremlin defense. Instead he said there was no evidence of intent to provide weapons to shoot down a civilian aircraft.
"There is no evidence before the court," he told the judges, "plausible or otherwise, that Russia provided weaponry to any party with the intent or knowledge that such weaponry be used to shoot down civilian aircraft."
"Whoever was allegedly supplying this Buk was acting in response to a series of armed strikes by Ukraine's military aircraft," Wordsworth stressed, adding that Ukraine's prosecution allegedly lacks data about how the Buk could possibly be used.
He also noted that Ukraine had not provided any fundamental evidence of Russia supplying weapons to militants in the east of the country.
Related materials: Russian terrorists downed MH17
"People who still claim it was Ukrainian Buk are hopeless," - Bellingcat founder Higgins on МН17 crash(0)
Dutch Public Prosecution Service says a lot remains unclear in radar images obtained from Russia under MH17 downing investigation(0)