Translated material
BURDEN MACHINE
COURT YES CASE
The next hearing in the case of the former Yukos leaders showed that the case is fairly overloaded with meaningless evidence and materials, and representatives of the Prosecutor General's Office tend to look for evidence (or, on the contrary, hide their absence?) in ...
Another hearing in the case of the former Yukos leaders showed that the case is fairly overloaded with meaningless evidence and materials, and representatives of the Prosecutor General's Office tend to look for evidence (or, on the contrary, hide their absence?) in this troubled water. Apparently, they rely on their own loud statements, which, in the opinion of prosecutors, no one will dare to challenge.
At the next meeting in the Meshchansky Court, Platon Lebedev read from a large school notebook an explanation of his position on some statements by the state prosecutor Dmitry Shokhin and his leadership represented by First Deputy Prosecutor General Yuri Biryukov.
The defendant advised Dmitry Shokhin to ask the court to accept, firstly, only properly executed documents, and secondly, only when necessary, because the public prosecutor "should reasonably assess their value." “You cannot establish the truth by breaking the law,” Lebedev added.
Then Lebedev went to fight with Yuri Biryukov. He gave an interview in March entitled "No matter how much Yukos twists." Armed with notes, Lebedev commented on several thoughts of the Deputy Prosecutor General. He told, for example, that OAO Apatit is owned by Yukos. Lebedev objected that the Apatite company "never owned and does not own."
Biryukov said in an interview that Yukos "should have paid $283 million for shares" and "shouldn't consider yourself smarter than everyone else, and see others as fools." Lebedev, with figures in hand, proved that the investor had paid the full price of Apatit's shares - 415,000 rubles. (Who is to blame that the ruble has depreciated.) By the way, Lebedev noted, the monetary unit (see the Constitution) in Russia is not yet the dollar, but the ruble.
In response to Biryukov’s reproach, “not only Yukos was going to flee abroad, but Lebedev as well,” the head of Menatep suggested that Dmitry Shokhin go to Biryukov and show the case materials, which just prove the opposite. In conclusion, Lebedev urged the Prosecutor General's Office to come to their senses and apologize before it's too late, otherwise he promised to defend his honor and dignity in court. State prosecutor Shokhin, listening to this philippic, smiled.
Then Shokhin tried to get answers to some "important" questions from the witness Tatyana Rashina. For example, under what circumstances did Rashina and other leaders of the Property Fund of the Murmansk Region receive business cards in 1994 from Sergei Abramov, a representative of Menatep Bank. (Obviously, these business cards are the main material evidence of the prosecutor's office.)
Other testimony of Tatyana Rashina, in particular her statement that "the investment competition was held in accordance with the law", did not interest the prosecutor. He asked the court for permission to show the interrogation protocols to the witness: he saw “significant contradictions”. The defenders suggested not to waste time on reading, but to confine ourselves to additional questions. But the court again could not refuse the prosecutor. However, this did not help Dmitry Shokhin too much. "..."Menatep" has never been officially associated with the purchase of 20 percent of the shares of "Apatit"..." - read out in court.
During the lunch break, procedural opponents, escorts and journalists rushed to the nearest grocery store, which, thanks to the process, probably overfulfilled the sales plan a long time ago. In the bushes near the store there was a bus with special forces: probably, the fighters were sitting in ambush.
After the break, Nikolai Mukhaev, who worked as a legal adviser at the Property Fund of the Murmansk Region and was preparing a lawsuit to terminate the deal with 20 percent of Apatit's shares, testified. He told a story about how, after the termination of the contract by arbitration on the initiative of the Property Fund, someone began to “threat” the head of the fund, Khakimov, he became withdrawn, “locked himself in his office,” and soon died.
According to the witness, the Property Fund “tried to win Apatit over to its side, but the latter took the side of Menatep’s subsidiary, Volna…”. No wonder, because witnesses say that with the arrival of the investor, the situation at the plant has improved.
Genrikh Padva asked Nikolai Mukhaev whether the Property Fund itself returned the money for the shares after the termination of the contract.
No, I didn't return...
— Then why did Volna have to return the shares?
The witness could not clearly explain this contradiction.
Genrikh Padva addressed the judges: “We still cannot communicate promptly with the defendants ... The SIZO employees told us that documents can be handed over to the defendants in the hall with the permission of the presiding judge.” Judge Irina Kolesnikova asked the escorts if the lawyer had told the truth. The head of the convoy, nervously fiddling with his holster, confirmed: yes, the truth. We agreed that the lawyers and the defendants, before exchanging papers, would present them to the court. After that, for some reason, additional security was posted at the “cage”, and the escorts all the time tried to look into the screens of lawyer laptops: they were interested.
The last witness for the prosecution on Thursday was Tamara Ageyushkina, assistant to the first deputy general director of Apatit, who was engaged in office work at the enterprise. In 1994, the witness helped draw up payrolls for the employees of Apatit-trade (according to the prosecutor's office, a sales organization affiliated with Menatep). The woman looked clearly confused and even frightened. The defendants, as best they could, comforted her: "Just don't worry ...". The prosecutor, not having obtained the necessary evidence from her, was angry: “Do you understand the meaning of my questions?!”.
Genrikh Padva noted that this was "not a very legal way to influence a witness." Dmitry Shokhin complained to the judges: "The words of the defender of Padva are offensive to me and to the entire judicial system!" Irina Kolesnikova told the lawyer that “unethical statements about anyone” are unacceptable, and promised that “the court will monitor what is happening in the hall.”
In the evening, Genrikh Padva shared his impressions with journalists: “The last witness, to put it mildly, caused surprise, since it is not clear why she was called at all. <...> This is a frightened unfortunate woman, she was summoned for the first time first to the prosecutor's office, then to the court. I think that she was also mumbling something in the prosecutor’s office.”
On Friday, August 27, at the beginning of the meeting, the court approved (despite the protests of lawyers) a medical certificate on Lebedev's state of health. Doctors of the pre-trial detention center at a glance determined that Lebedev was quite healthy and could take part in the meetings. True, the authors of the document were “embarrassed” to indicate their names.
The state prosecutor was interested in the interaction between Apatit and related enterprises. Elena Tyapkova, who has been working as an accountant at Apatite since 1991, appeared in the courtroom. Khodorkovsky remarked that he was hoping for some benefit from her testimony. The prosecutor said menacingly: "Jokes are inappropriate here!".
The witness said that in 2000, for three to four months, she worked part-time in the company Varyag LLC (according to the prosecution, one of the front companies that resold Apatit products at inflated prices abroad from 1995 to 2002). ). There she performed technical work, for example, made photocopies of railway waybills for "balls". When asked what they were (apparently, spare parts for mining equipment), the witness explained only that “the balls are necessary in production.” No one understood how this information would help Shokhin.
Further, the state prosecutor asked to attach to the case a pile of papers on why some witnesses cannot currently stand trial. The defense asked permission to read the documents. The court adjourned.
After a break, Genrikh Padva began to analyze the documents aloud. For example, one of them turned out to be a cover letter to the record of the interrogation of a witness. Moreover, the protocol itself was absent, and the interrogation was carried out when the trial of Khodorkovsky had already begun. Some of the documents turned out to be notifications that the witnesses were on vacation or on a business trip, but would return in early September. Some papers were left without seals and signatures. Another paper testified to the fact that the local policeman visited the witness, but no one was at home.
Andrey Krainov's defense reported that the "elusive" witness is serving a sentence, so it is strange to look for him anywhere except the zone. And Genrikh Padva said that "investigative actions are continuing to make up for the shortcomings of the preliminary investigation." And this is actually the case: the prosecution regularly presents documents proving that investigative actions are ongoing, and this is prohibited by law. The lawyer lamented that “of course, it is impossible to completely equalize our rights with the state prosecution”, but he encounters such a violation of the principle of equality of arms in a trial for the first time. Lawyer Timofey Gridnev drew the attention of those present to the fact that one protocol of interrogation was dated December 15, 2004: “Of course, the state prosecutor will say that this is a technical error ... Then the whole thing is one big technical error!”
The prosecutor was cold: "Somehow it all turns out badly ...".
Lebedev appealed to the court: “When Dmitry Eduardovich (Shokhin. - I.K.) remembered the Constitution, it was the only time the court did not attach documents to the case. I ask you to take the provisions of the Constitution into account this time as well.” The court quickly decided: to attach documents, with and without seals, even dated next winter - all without exception.