Frown money

The judge of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow Elena Gudoshnikova, as part of the consideration of the case of the “Threat” campaign, accepted a civil lawsuit against the accused Peter Pavlensky in the amount of 48,1461 rubles and 83 kopecks. This was reported by Interfax with reference to the press service of the court.

The lawsuit was stated by Dmitry Kazakov, a representative of the recognized victim military unit 55002. According to him, the repair of the FSB building on Lubyanka settled by the Pavlensky door of the Pavlensky door was estimated.

It is this amount that appears in the indictment in the case of the “threat” campaign.

On the night of November 9, 2015, Pavlensky doused the front door of the entrance No. 1 of the Russian FSB building with gasoline and set it on fire. “The Lubyanka’s burning door is a glove that society throws into the face of a terrorist threat ... But terrorism can only exist due to the animal instinct of fear. To go against this human instinct forces an unconditional protective reflex,” the action said in the manifesto.

The artist, standing in front of the burning door, was almost immediately detained. The next day he was arrested . About six months Pavlensky was kept in the capital's pre-trial detention center-2 Butyrka; In early May, he was transferred to SIZO-4 "Bear" .

Initially, the artist was charged with part 2 of Article 214 of the Criminal Code (vandalism based on ideological hatred), which provides for up to three years of the colony. At the end of March, however, it became known about the retraining of the case to Part 1 of Article 243 of the Criminal Code (damage to the revealed cultural heritage object), which suggests the same maximum term.

At the same time, lawyer Olga Dinze in November found out that the door set by the artist was made in 2008 and was not of historical value.

Pavlensky himself, however, from the moment of the initiation of the case, achieved his re -qualification to Article 205 of the Criminal Code (terrorist attack). He explained his demand by the fact that it was this article that the defendants in the Crimean prisoners and the Crimean prisoners, who were also charged with arson, were charged.

On May 18, at the first meeting, on the merits of the case, Pavlensky once again demanded to re -qualify the accusation of an article on the attack. “Stop hiding under hypocritical humanism and show your true larva,” he said to Gudoshnikova. “I am observing the regulations of silence.”

Gudoshnikova turned to lawyers Dmitry and Olga Dinze with the question of whether they have a request for retraining of the case. “We cannot interpret his words,” the lawyers answered. Pavlensky himself, following the declared "regulations of silence", ignored the question of the judge. As a result, the official request for retraining was not submitted.