Headless analysis

According to the lawyer of Left Front activist Leonid Razvozzhaev, Dmitry Agranovsky, one of the cases brought against his client has been closed. This is a case about a robbery that allegedly took place in 1997 in Angarsk, when Razvozzhaev allegedly took away a batch of fur hats from a local businessman. This case was remembered when Razvozzhaev was already in Lefortovo on charges of preparing to organize mass riots (this case was opened after the release of the scandalous NTV film “Anatomy of a Protest-2”), despite the fact that the statute of limitations was about to expire . This did not prevent the authorities from sending Razvozzhaev to Irkutsk after the deadline had expired. On the way, it became known that Razvozzhaev filed an application to dismiss the case due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. The closure of the case was announced when Razvozzhaev was already in Irkutsk. Now he needs to undergo a medical examination and return to Moscow. Why they took it is unclear. All this looks like a sophisticated mockery. After all, Razvozzhaev appeared in Lefortovo under unclear circumstances. He himself claims that he was kidnapped in Kyiv, where he tried to obtain political asylum, then somewhere, apparently in the Bryansk region, he was tortured and under threats he was forced to write a confession. Currently, in addition to the “anatomical” case, Razvozzhaev is accused of illegally crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border, as well as false denunciation due to the fact that at one of the court hearings he pointed to a person present in the hall and stated that he took part in torture. Razvozzhaev’s wife Yulia and Left Front comrade Alexei Sakhnin reported then that this was investigator Dmitry Pleshivtsev, who conducted searches at the oppositionists’ home.

The “anatomical” case was recently combined into a common proceeding with the case of the mass riots on Bolotnaya Square on May 6.

Since the cap case was closed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, Razvozzhaev has no right to demand compensation for illegal criminal prosecution and unjustified detention.