In the opposition

The results of the year. Process

January 14, 2010 Daily Journal

In the old New Year, “Daily Journal” offers readers a sample of the most remarkable phrases, replicas and monologues uttered by state prosecutors during the second process over Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Plato Lebedev.

The record holder by the number of pearls is, of course, the prosecutor Valery Lakhtin . This is not surprising - reading volumes of business and interrogation of witnesses most often fell on his lot. Sometimes the prosecutor pleased the listeners with such manifestations of pure genius:

"A number of people were hiding, in the UK, in particular, in Cyprus."

"Reading newspapers could exert physiological pressure on a witness."

"The materials are not fabricated, they are stitched and numbered!"

Sometimes he gave important explanations:

"Look at the Moskalz citizen." In response to the judge’s perplexed question “Is there that it says“ Moskalets-citizen ”?” The prosecutor reacted with directness: “It is written - Moskalets. So, a citizen. Moskalets is not the name of the company. This is the surname. "

Explanations could turn into a kind of addition to questions. Apparently, the question "Who determined where the companies should be registered?" It turned out not enough, and Valery Alekseevich asked: "And on whose initiative the companies were registered?" The judge’s doubts, not one and the same question, answered:

"Nuuu ... he complements."

He showed zealous concern for witnesses and experts: having heard the question asked by Plato Lebedev expert Yuri Schoolnikov, whether he knew the content of the law “On Appraisal value” during the drawing up, the prosecutor said that the question “offends the expert and his personal virtues” and explained: explained: explained: explained: explained: explained:

"He refers to his intellectual level ... to his memory!"

At the same time, he could easily give the witness his own words and thoughts. "Did Elfimov have an attitude, as you said, to pricing policy?" He asked George Tyan's witness. However, with the protest of Lebedev, who declared that the witness had never said the word “politician”, Lakhtin easily agreed:

"That's right, this is my word!"

He demonstrated a reverent attitude to the indictment: when Platon Lebedev declared after the departing expert schoolchikov that he had not yet asked him questions on Apatite, the prosecutor did not fail to react that this did not apply to the charges; In response to the objection of Khodorkovsky that there is “apatite” of the charge, retorted:

"Only on the first page!" (It turned out that on eight.)

He demanded that the accused always refer to documents:

“When Lebedev asks questions in the style of“ Do I understand correctly ... ”, let him come in to where the witness said this! In what interrogation?! In which document? Let him refer to the finished protocol of the hearing! This is profanity! " (Lebedev had to explain that we were talking about the words made by a witness two minutes ago.)

He consistently showed a unique approach to distinguishing between the originals and copies: when it turned out that what he called the original is a copy, Lakhtin intercepted:

“This is a copy of the original. Well, it happens that they make a copy from the original. ”

If the lawyer suddenly paid attention to some corrections in the text of the document, the prosecutor rushed into battle:

“There are no handwritten corrections here. Probably, the defenders are correcting something there. ”

Valery Alekseevich developed special relations with foreign languages. For simplicity, he reduced them to one and spoke like this:

"The translation of Zueva, even visually visible, coincides with the data in the document in the Latin language."

When Lebedev pointed to him that the Mikhail Sublin, which was discovered in the document, is, in fact, Michel Sublane, Lakhtin, offended by the translator, answered:

“I ask you to note that Plato Lebedev is not a professional translator and cannot competently talk about translations.”

Lachtin himself was clearly strongly worried. He asked Elena Atanov how the name of a certain company was translated, and having received an unsatisfactory answer “this is not translated”, he still tried to get to the truth:

"Well, what semantic load does this name have?"

In general, Valery Alekseevich sought to reach the very essence even when everyone said that he could not reach her. Three times, witness Svetlana Khitrova replied that she was unknown to Butler Enterprises Limited, but the prosecutor did not despair:

“It is unknown in the framework of the signing of a specific document, maybe it is known in the framework of the signing of another document.”

Sometimes the prosecutor was so fond of that he even actually took over the functions of the judge. When the real judge Viktor Danilkin was surprised why Valery Lakhtin interrupts the witness who had begun to answer and immediately asks a new question, the prosecutor explained:

"And I removed the previous question!"

It seems that give Lahtin the will, and he will hold all of them - and those who are inaccessible:

"I would like to see Nonznin here!" -

And even witnesses:

"How can you explain your votes" for "from the point of view of the legislation?" - He advancing menacingly and clarified that he was interrogating the witness "as a citizen of the Russian Federation", since "ignorance of laws does not exempt from responsibility."

It was nice to get acquainted with the sincere revelations of the prosecutor. So, having said “Mars-23” instead of “Mars-22”, he admitted with directness, “from the heart” (in his words): he admitted:

"There would be fewer companies in the country - it would be easier to live!"

When the witness admitted that he did not like the investigator too much, Lakhtin suddenly complained:

"I also do not like me, too."

It was possible to hear much less from the prosecutor Dmitry Shokhin , who was mainly silent. However, he was breaking through when unsuitable lawyers (his lawyer Vladimir Krasnov was especially indignant), for example, dared to complain about the termination of the broadcast from the courtroom:

“I really want lawyers to see the public how Krasnov’s arrogance is disappeared as soon as it arises to bend down and pleading appears. Or how Krasnov shows everyone his impressive back! "

But how the prosecutor of Gulchera Ibragimov was revealed, speaking with answers to the petition of lawyers and the statements of the accused! When the same outrageous lawyer Krasnov asked how much taxpayers should be spent so that the prosecutors realized their obligation to abandon the absurd accusation, she answered the following:

“Touching seems to be concern for taxpayers by lawyers. Then why are lawyers so afraid to devote the same taxpayers, what fees they receive in this case? They wanted to spit on Russians and taxpayers - they had to think about them when their customers Khodorkovsky and Lebedev plundered Russia. So there is nothing to blame on the mirror if someone has something crooked. ”

And it doesn’t laugh at all when you read such lines of authorship of the prosecutor Ibrahimova:

“Once again I repeat - for us this is another process. After Khodorkovsky and Lebedev, other defendants will be. Personally, Lebedev, who even appeals to the Almighty aloud, I will say: "Do not wait!"

However, maybe it is better to laugh here.