Personal business of a lawyer?

The Kursk case is political. Moreover, the presidential. But the national tragedy "Kursk", apparently, has already stopped being. 2003 material

“The decision to close the criminal case on Kursk was political. Now I can directly talk about the falsification of examinations, on the basis of which the investigation made conclusions. My goal is to reveal the eyes to society into the dishonesty of experts, fencing the admirals. Admirals should sit on the bench of the defendants. ” This emotional statement of the lawyer Kuznetsov was made last Tuesday in the Presnensky court, where the lawyer’s lawsuit was considered to protect honor, dignity and business reputation against the Ministry of Defense (MO), the Main Judgeum of Law, Moral City Physics and Personnel, the chief navigator of the Navy S. Kozlov.

The history of this claim is curious. At the end of last year, lawyer Boris Kuznetsov, representing the interests of the families of the dead submariners, filed a petition to the main military prosecutor to return the criminal case on Kursk for the investigation.

A serious logical discrepancy in the criminal case between the established facts and the followed conclusions forced Kuznetsov’s lawyer to doubt the independence of the investigation at the final stage, when the main question was decided: whether to transfer the “Kursk” case to court or to close it safely?

And the innocence of “officials” in Admiral uniforms is based on only two examinations. The authors of these examinations are the chief forensic expert of the Ministry of Defense Viktor Kolkutin and the deputy chief navigator of the Navy Sergey Kozlov, now the main navigator of the Navy.

Apparently, the arguments of the lawyer were painful, since on January 12 of this year a press conference was held in the military hospital Burdenko, at which Lieutenant Colonel V.V. Kolkutin and captain of the 1st rank S.V. Kozlov. The officers accused Kuznetsov’s lawyer of lies and an attempt to “raise their image in the eyes of the public due to the death of the crew of the Kursk April. Kolkutin said: “The version that in the ninth compartment people were alive until August 14 ... is unfounded and not based on anything”; Kuznetsov “does not have reliable facts and refers to incompetent specialists”; Kuznetsov’s statements are “insulting for science and personally for experts.”

Boris Kuznetsov, perhaps, would have ignored these statements. But not in this situation.

In the last Tuesday, the second meeting of the court in this lawsuit was held.

Basically, all six hours (the process lasted so much) the conversation was on the merits. That is, about the Criminal case of Kursk, about the circumstances of the death of 23 submariners, about how the examinations of Kolkutin and Kozlov were tucked and why they formed the basis of the decision on the termination of the criminal case on Kursk.

In the criminal case of Kursk, in fact, two packages of forensic medical examinations. The first package included the examinations of bodies of 12 submariners raised from the 9th compartment in October 2000.

The experts led by Kolkutin had the task: to determine the time of death of submariners. And the experts answered quite definitely. I quote: “to answer the question about the prescription (specific date and time) of the onset of death ... it is not possible, since the solution of this issue ... goes beyond the competence of forensic experts.” All experts signed under this, including Kolkutin. This is very important! Judicial doctors clearly said that they could not - science cannot! -Determine how much time people lived in the 9th compartment. Therefore, it was possible to determine this on the basis of other examinations, for example, by the time of filling out the boat compartments with water, the time of fire in the 9th compartment, identifying the knocks of SOS and the time when they were recorded.

But it was not possible to find out the time of filling out the compartments, nor when the fire began in the 9th compartment. But the experts of the acoustic and phonographic examination found that SOS signals were recorded until the evening of August 14. The revealed facts led to a direct accusion of the fleet officials, who led the exercises and the search and rescue operation.

Therefore, there was a need for examinations that would give a different interpretation of the facts about the life expectancy of people in the 9th compartment.

Therefore, a commission examination appeared 77/02, which was also headed by Kolkutin. Its content, however, amounted to 12 previously conducted examinations. In all these examinations, the same formulation takes place: “... it is impossible to accurately establish the time of death regarding the moment of the accident of the submarine ...” and “... death occurred within a few hours from the moment the fire occurred in the boat compartment ...”.

However, on the last page there are unreleased conclusions: “Members of the crew of the Kursk APRK, located in the 9th compartment after the second seismic event (11 hours 30 minutes on August 12, 2000), remained alive for 4.5-8 hours ...”.

Thus, it turns out that Kolkutin in one case is signed under the fact that the exact time of the death of submarines cannot be determined, and in the second case, ignoring their own (!) The arguments, under which he signed earlier, claims that death occurred no later than 4.5 - 8 hours. In one case, Kolkutin claims that the death of the submariners occurred a few hours after the fire, and in the second examination of Kolkutin, submariners die after the second explosion.

It was this conclusion that independent experts questioned, to whom the lawyer Kuznetsov addressed.

The first examination was conducted under the leadership of the Doctor of Medical Sciences, Academician Solokhin Anatoly. We conducted this examination at the Russian Center of the Forensic Medical Expertise of the Ministry of Health of Russia (there is simply no more qualified institution in our country).

The second examination was carried out at the Department of Forensic Medicine of the Russian State Medical University under the leadership of Professor Plaksin V.O. At one time, he was the chief forensic expert of the Russian Federation.

The third examination came from Norway from a professor at the University of Berggen Inge Murilla.

All these experts dispute the conclusions of Viktor Kolkutin that submariners lived no more than 4.5 - 8 hours after the second explosion. And they come to the conclusion that the “science” in this case is not Kuznetsov’s lawyer, questioning the official examination, namely Colonel of the Medical Service of Kolkutin.

But these are the conclusions of independent experts. And Victor Kolkutin wears epaulets.

Now about the examination of Kozlov. The task before the navigator was cynical, but extremely clear. There are knocks SOS. But it is necessary that they are not. Therefore, the captain of the 1st rank had to solve an extremely difficult moral dilemma. He got out of the situation. He simply took and inscribed the following phrase in an acoustic and phonographic examination: “Most of (85%) of the crossings of the Pelenges ( all knocks, technical noise, etc., which issued 22 ships in the disaster. - EM ) ... were outside the specified area ( boat flood coordinates. - E.M .)”. This phrase “killed” the entire acoustic and phonographic examination.

Because the investigation allowed the conclusion that “an emergency signals made by a person by hitting a metal object for metal (most likely, with an emergency hammer on the intersector bulkhead, rigidly connected with the strong body of the submarine), are not SOS signals with Kursk. These are SOS signals "from the underwater part of the surface ship located outside the limits of the death area of ​​the underwater cruiser."

However, here the investigation contradicts the acoustic and phonographic examination, where only the probability is allowed that the knocks could proceed from the surface ship. But then these knocks "must listen to the background of working mechanisms and devices, which was not noted with analysis."

SOS signals were recorded against the background of non -working mechanisms, against the background of murmuring water and air exit from the boat compartments. That is, SOS signals came from the sunken submarine. And this is also indicated in the criminal case. Why did the investigation prefer not to notice this? Because the knocks of SOS, which decrypted as “save our souls”, are the only direct evidence that submariners lived in the 9th compartment at least 2.5 days.

... Judge Tyulenev made a decision on this process for almost an hour and a half. Judge Tyulenev did not satisfy the lawyer Kuznetsov.

Judge Tyulenev can be understood. But, at least, he made it possible for lawyer Kuznetsov to publicly speak out “in the case of the 9th compartment”, give evidence and not receive a single refutation from the representatives of Kolkutin and Kozlov in response.

Maybe that's why Kuznetsov’s lawyer did not look offended. Yes, and compensation for non -pecuniary damage from the defendants, including the Ministry of Defense, he demanded a minimum - 1 ruble.

But Viktor Kolkutin appreciated his honor and business reputation of 5 million rubles! After the publication in Novaya Gazeta, the article “Case Kursk” must be opened again ”, he filed a lawsuit to our newspaper.

We (or submariners of the 23rd compartment?) The lawyer of Kuznetsov defends again. To prove the “Facts of the Facts” - this is what Viktor Kolkutin demanded.

We have evidence. Which, however, is not always important for our judges. We understand what a difficult situation we put (and we will put) our courts with our desire to bring the Kursk case to the end. Any positive court decision on our claims to the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the Navy will lead to a military court. And the admirals will sit down.

PS

Kolkutin’s lawsuit against Novaya Gazeta will be discussed on November 6 at 15 o’clock in the Basmanny court. The process has not yet been closed ...