The woman behind the pseudonym "Sandy" has publicly presented her version of events for the first time, addressing her involvement in the case, her contacts with lawyer Nicos Clerides and journalists Stelios Orphanides and Makarios Drousiotis, the disputed messages at the centre of the controversy, and the statement she later provided to police.
In a written statement sent to Cyprus Times, she acknowledges that her involvement stemmed from her own choices and says she gradually adopted the role of "Sandy". At the same time, she rejects suggestions that everything that followed and was later made public can be attributed solely to her.
"I am not writing this to ask anyone to justify me," she says at the start of her statement. "I am writing it because for a long time my side was not heard as I actually experienced it."
"My involvement began through my own choices"
Referring to the beginning of the case, the woman says her involvement originated through discussions with lawyer Nicos Clerides.
"My involvement in the case began through my own choices. I do not deny that," she writes.
Describing how those contacts evolved, she adds:
"At first it was a conversation. Then came the questions. The answers brought new questions and, at some point, I began stepping into a role. The role of 'Sandy'."
In her written statement, she does not specify in detail which elements of what she said at the time reflected real events and which formed part of the role she describes.
"I am not using any label as a diagnosis or an excuse. I am simply trying to describe how a person can be drawn into a role and find it increasingly difficult, as time passes, to leave it."
"That is my part of the story. It does not mean, however, that everything that followed originated from me," she adds.
Contacts with Stelios Orphanides and Makarios Drousiotis
According to her account, her first communication with journalist Stelios Orphanides took place in 2020 through the mediation of Nicos Clerides.
In her statement she does not detail the content of those conversations or specify what information she passed on.
She says this was followed by communication with Makarios Drousiotis and a meeting on 26 April 2023 at a café in the Mall of Cyprus.
"I wanted to attend the meeting and listen. To understand what this person knew," she writes.
She claims that during the meeting she formed the impression that Drousiotis already had knowledge of elements of the case.
"I did not feel that I was revealing an unknown case to him. I felt that I was facing a person who had already formed his own picture," she says.
She also refers to a public statement by Orphanides regarding a meeting with Drousiotis in Athens in 2023. Based on her account, the two journalists had compared information they possessed and believed they were communicating with the same person.
"I do not accept the version that all the information later presented as the basis of the case came from me," she writes.
What she says about the disputed messages
Particular attention is given to the messages that became central to the case.
The woman says the mobile phone she was using at the time has been lost and is therefore unavailable for technical examination.
However, she argues that available technical data from other devices or accounts could be examined in order to investigate the path of the messages.
"If there is available technical data capable of answering these questions, I believe it should be examined by an independent and qualified expert through every lawful means," she writes.
She then addresses Makarios Drousiotis directly:
"Is Mr Drousiotis willing to allow an independent and lawful technical examination of the available data from his device and related accounts, solely regarding the route of these specific messages until they reached him? I ask that the route of the messages be followed and that the available data be allowed to speak."
She also says that after her meeting with Drousiotis she changed phones and distanced herself from the case.
However, she does not clarify when or under what circumstances the previous device was lost, nor whether copies of the communications still exist.
Statement to police
The woman also refers to her decision to appear before police on 2 April 2026 and provide a written statement, two days after a public post by Drousiotis concerning the case.
Commenting on the public exposure of the affair, she says:
"For me it was a shocking moment. Because suddenly I was no longer simply a person who had become involved in a private story. I had become a public figure in a case that everyone was discussing."
Explaining her decision to give evidence, she states:
"Not to protect someone. Not to attack someone. But so that 'Sandy' could finally stop being a character onto whom everyone could project their own version."
At the same time, she rejects allegations that she was blackmailed, manipulated or bribed into giving a particular account of the messages.
In her statement she refers to a police announcement which, she says, found that no criminal offences had been established and that the messages examined were not authentic, while their contents were deemed false and unfounded.
"I do not want to use that development as an alibi for anything," she says. "But I do want it to be understood that reality is far more complex than the picture that was initially created."
Acknowledges involvement, rejects broader responsibility
The statement leaves open questions regarding the motive behind the creation of the "Sandy" persona, the precise information communicated to different individuals and the creation of the disputed messages.
She nevertheless acknowledges her participation while rejecting responsibility for everything that followed.
"I acknowledge my own participation in the story. I do not, however, accept responsibility for things I did not do, did not say and did not pass on," she writes.
Concluding her statement, she says:
"At some point a role was created. That role grew. Other people entered the story. The story took on public dimensions. And in the end, the person behind the role found herself having to prove that she exists. That person is me."
She ends with the following appeal:
"Today I do not want to speak as 'Sandy'. I want to speak as a human being. I am not asking for special treatment. I am not asking people to believe me without evidence. I am asking to be judged for what I actually did and not for what other people continued to write into the story. And above all, I ask for something simple: let the evidence speak. This is my truth."
