“What are you talking about?!”

Defendant Sopot, who is accused of involvement in the murder of Novaya correspondent Igor Domnikov, told the court about naivety: he did not know that a friend was the leader of a gang, and did not even imagine that a request to “meet a journalist” could end in murder

The trial of the brutal beating of Novaya journalist Igor Domnikov is nearing completion. At one of the last sessions in the Lublin Court of Moscow, the defendant Pavel Sopot made his testimony (according to the investigators, we recall that he was the direct instigator of this beating, which ended in the death of Igor). The essence of Sopot's testimony: he is a man of crystal honesty, he never even thought of solving problems with people in this way. This is all - the leader of the gang, Eduard Tagiryanov, about whose criminal activities the defendant “knew nothing”.

In turn, the defendant's friend Krasinkov, who was a witness, did not know anything bad about Sopot, although he met him through Tagiryanov and was even convicted of one of the many episodes of murders committed by this bloody gang.

- And could not refuse Tagiryanov? even Sopot's lawyer Inga Dolzhikova asked the witness.

- It was not possible. It just so happened.

About the relationship between Sopot and Tagiryanov, the witness said: “They were friends. I saw them in a restaurant, on a fishing trip a couple of times. As for the beating of Domnikov, even here Krasinkov did not say a single bad word about his friend Sopot - well, he “did not know” anything:

- We talked about this with Pavel two years ago. He was upset that he was called in for questioning. I asked: “What are you doing here?” - "I do not know".

Nothing new was added by the speech of the next witness - another member of the Tagiryanovsky gang, Nikolai Kazakov, who was sentenced to 20 years. This is the same person who called out to Domnikov at the entrance so that another bandit, Khuzin, could strike from behind with a hammer. Kazakov was interrogated via video link. He said that Sopot was a friend and companion of Tagiryanov, with whom he often spent his free time. The witness knew nothing more about Sopot. The order to “send the journalist to the hospital” was given to him by Bezuglov, Tagiryanov’s right hand, and the order was given to him by the ringleader himself. Nobody asked Edward. This is purely his initiative, ”Kazakov decided to help the defendant, who supported the testimony of Tagiryanov, sentenced to life, — he was the only one of all the interrogated bandits who took everything upon himself, smearing his comrade.

Kazakov talked about the crime itself casually, as if it was not about the death of a person, but about the theft of a wallet.

- We ( Kazakov and the rest of the gang members already interrogated by the court . - V.Ch. ) were told to come to Moscow by Bezuglov. We arrived, he said that this journalist wrote bad articles about some official. Bezuglov drew us a plan of action, and a few days later we committed this crime. But we did not kill him, Bezuglov told us that we should simply scare the journalist, beat him. But the blow was too heavy...

And now - the culmination of the process: the interrogation of Sopot himself, who until then was silent in the "aquarium". Of course, the accusation was “incomprehensible” to him, he did not admit guilt, and his story was “touching”:

- In 1991, we met Tagiryanov. My co-op was great. He said that he also wanted to open some kind of production, but lacked funds and experience. I decided to help by lending money. In the course of our communication, we found one common hobby - fishing. I'm a professional fisherman. In this regard, it was interesting for me to communicate with him. And so, in essence, we were completely different people. He had his friends whom I did not know at all. I have mine, which he did not know. Once I was at Tagiryanov's wedding, once at Bezuglov's wedding, several times Tagiryanov invited me to barbecues. I felt completely uncomfortable in this company. Kazakov was there, Khuzin, Bezuglov - I didn't know what to talk about with them! I have never spoken to anyone about crime in my life! Not with Tagiryanov, not with Bezuglov, not with any Petrov...

In general, I was minding my own business. I had a sewing cooperative, I went to America, to France - I was already studying the Western market, production ... Around 1993, Tagiryanov contacted me again. He said that he had a customer for the construction of an vinegar plant and asked me to help him. We built the plant quickly. After that, Tagiryanov offered to build a distillery, since at that time he was organizing and selling alcohol. I agreed again, even brought the French to the construction site. We also built the plant quickly, but it did not work for long - employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs began to come to the plant, to arrange various checks. Tagiryanov clearly told me then that he started having problems, that “they won’t let me work”, the plant should be sold. And I decided to leave for Moscow, I began to build my house in the suburbs. Tagiryanov also moved.

In general, Tagiryanov was an unpredictable person for me in his actions. Although he treated me very kindly. Always fishing, I was not even allowed to wash the dishes. Fulfilled all my whims. Well, this was the man. A mystery, - this is how the defendant told about the leader of the gang, who was responsible for several dozen murders. He liked to make his friends dependent on him, to use every opportunity to do a favor for a person, and then ask for something in return.

“So, having moved to Moscow in 1996,” Sopot continued, “I opened my own car dealership. Tagiryanov appeared once every six months: he would sit in the office, we would drink tea. At the end of 1999, he called me, told me that he was working with my former business partner on mutual settlements with Gazprom, and said that they had decided to invite me. <…> I was offered to go to Lipetsk. When I arrived, I immediately turned to Lipetskoblgaz, a direct debtor of Gazprom. Lipetskoblagz provided me with its debtors. And the administration of the region was engaged in issuing a formal order that it was notified that the sale of products had been made and the regional budget received taxes from the profits. The administration could not influence the offset in any way, as this investigation is trying to present. The order for 10 million rubles was issued on April 5, 2000. While it was being coordinated, metal prices changed at the Novolipetsk Combine. Therefore, the administration was forced to amend and issue a new order on April 20. That's what the delay is about. And then the investigator messed up, supposedly the delay occurred for a reason. But in fact, the order was issued before the attack on Domnikov took place.

... A remark is needed here. Indeed, the defendant is right, the order was issued before the attack, but for a long time lay without movement, and only after Igor was in the hospital, the offset was made. According to witnesses who were related to such transactions in the Lipetsk region, documents were usually signed quickly, but here everything was somehow strange ...

- As for Dorovsky, - Sopot said further about the man who, then holding the post of vice-governor of the Lipetsk region, in our opinion, became the initiator of the attack on Domnikov, - I came to see him as a representative of Gazprom. I was interested in how enterprises pay taxes, how stable they are in the market, and to get information about enterprises. So the role of Dorovsky in my work was purely informational. Dorovskoy did not have the opportunity to influence the offsetting, since according to the law this was decided only by the participants in the offset ( however, Dorovskoy himself, albeit confusingly, made it clear that it still depended on him - he was the one who oversaw such transactions. - Approx. ed. ). <...> Yes, I turned out to be an unwitting witness to a conversation between Dorovsky in his office on a selector with his colleague ( the head of the press service of the regional administration, the conversation was about Domnikov's articles. - Approx. ed. ). And I asked, "What happened?" Understand, I could not help but ask this out of a sense of respect, out of a sense of solidarity. Dorovskoy said that an article had been published that had no objective basis. Journalist from Moscow. That's exactly what he said: "Maybe you will have the opportunity to meet with him, explain that he can come to the administration, get reliable information." I couldn't say, "I don't want to do this." I said, “Okay. I will try". Out of respect, I took the paper. Maybe I did it because of my naive stupidity. Because he was not brought up in the Moscow way. I am Ural.

- And the most important thing. You can imagine the situation: the first deputy governor sees me, a stranger, three times for 15-20 minutes and offers me to beat the journalist in my personal office and put him in the hospital. How is it possible?! You have to be a strange lieutenant governor. What, this person had no one closer to me in life? Or what, I looked like some kind of hitman? I think it's just bullshit. Any normal person, especially a businessman, was well aware that even putting pressure on a journalist who writes about the area in which the businessman works is a direct threat to the businessman to lose business. Where is the common sense? ( As Novaya Gazeta suggests, the common sense here is that Dorovsky and Sopot were still connected by something more than 2-3 meetings. - Approx. ed. )

The judge was also surprised by this explanation:

- Doesn't it seem strange to you that Dorovskoy asked you, a stranger who became an unwitting participant in a conversation over an intercom, to meet with a journalist? Didn't that bother you? I still understand if you had known each other for a year or two. But you saw him for the third time in your life.

- Well, the request was not of any nature, he just asked if there were opportunities ...

- And what makes you think that you will be able to get information on enterprises from the vice-governor?

- Why not?

- Why yes? Why? Do they give you this kind of information?

Yes, everywhere. I have such a method of work, - the defendant answered without embarrassment and continued the story: - About three or four days later, we had dinner with Tagiryanov in a restaurant. I always carried a briefcase in which I had valuable documents with me. Therefore, I have a newspaper and ended up in a restaurant. I accidentally remembered the conversation with Dorovsky, retold it to Tagiryanov, hoping that he might have connections in journalism. My request was to meet the journalist and explain to him that he should come to the region. I didn't ask to be scared. Tagiryanov responded and asked me for a newspaper. Due to my busyness, I even forgot about this conversation with Tagiryanov, I didn’t ask him anything further, since I didn’t visit Dorovsky anymore, and this topic didn’t interest me at all. I found out about what happened to Domnikov when the investigation began on Tagiryanovsky.

- When did you find out that Tagiryanov was involved in crime? - Followed by a question from the prosecutor.

- You won't believe it. In 2003, when they were arrested, I personally approached Bezuglov and asked him: “Why was Eduard arrested?” He answered me that all this is nonsense, that there is a slander. For me, by the way, Bezuglov himself and all the others - Kazakov, Khuzin - were simple loader guys, normal guys. From the looks of it, you don't think so.

- Did you even guess that Tagiryanov would solve the issue with a journalist through criminal means?

— Yes you that?! What is the meaning of a criminal way to solve?! Think healthy. Yes, I am a businessman. How could I afford such a thing to cast some kind of even a shadow on myself?!

- You told us today that the administration did not take part in the offsets in any way and could not influence the settlement in any way. Then why did you need Dorovskoy? This is a vice-governor, not an information bureau, - asked the lawyer of Domnikov's widow Rita Marina Andreeva.

- I already explained - the purpose was informational. Well, I came to an official who holds a public office, and what, he can deceive me?

- I ask you, what reason did you have to trust him, that he would give you information, moreover, of a commercial nature?

- Ask a specific question. I will answer.

- I already asked. You did not answer. Tell me, when you turned to Tagiryanov with a request to find a journalist, what grounds did you have to believe that Tagiryanov had connections in this circle? Did you know that he had acquaintances of journalists, chief editors?

I knew that he had many acquaintances.

I'm asking specifically.

Specifically, I didn't know.

- You had a newspaper, an article. You know how to read, why didn’t you yourself turn to Novaya Gazeta, call, don’t come?

- I was very busy, I had no time to do it. Out of respect, I couldn't say no to Dorovsky. And accepting an offer does not mean fulfilling it.

- Good answer. That is, Dorovskoy asked you, and didn't you offer him?

- He asked. And I asked Tagiryanov if he had any acquaintances in the field of journalism and if it was possible to somehow contact the editor of this newspaper or someone else in order to meet - not necessarily with Domnikov, but also with Muratov.

— Yes, Muratov was lucky. Sopot, you somehow awkwardly come up with everything ...

At the end of the interrogation, the defendant considered it necessary to declare to Margarita Domnikova that he was not guilty of the death of her husband:

Whatever they say about me, trust me. You will eventually find out.