Verdict to Berd Nazi skinheads

We are publishing the text of the verdict to a group of Berdsk Nazi skinheads, handed down on December 28, 2006 by the Berdsk City Court of the Novosibirsk Region, with subsequent changes related to the cassation of convicts dated May 7, 2007 . The text is reproduced according to the publication of the GAS "Pravosudie".

**SENTENCE

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION**

Berdsk

December 28, 2006.

Berdsk City Court of the Novosibirsk Region, consisting of:

Judge Verkhovsky V.A.

with the participation of the public prosecutor of the prosecutor's office of the city of Berdsk, Novosibirsk region, senior assistant prosecutor O. V. Sidorova,

defendants:

**B.A.A. Born October 10, 1978, native of the city of Lensk, Republic of Yakutsk-Sakhe, Russian, citizen of the Russian Federation, liable for military service, with a higher education, single, working at LLC Teleset, Novosibirsk, an installer, with no previous convictions, living in the Novosibirsk region, Novosibirsk Berdsk, not in custody;

D.E.V. Born January 11, 1986, native of Berdsk, Novosibirsk Region, citizen of the Russian Federation, Russian, liable for military service, with secondary education, single, working at Center ST LLC, Berdsk, storekeeper, with no previous convictions, living in Novosibirsk Region, Berdsk , who was detained from 03 to 08 November 2005;

I.D.V. Born January 17, 1989, native of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent region, Chirchik, citizen of the Russian Federation, Russian, pre-conscript, with secondary education, single, not working, no previous convictions, living in the Novosibirsk region, Berdsk, detained from 03 to November 05, 2005;

K.A.S. Born on December 27, 1984, native of the city of Berdsk, Novosibirsk Region, citizen of the Russian Federation, Russian, liable for military service, with a secondary special education, single, working as a loader at Center ST LLC, Berdsk, with no previous convictions, living in the Novosibirsk Region, Berdsk, who has been in custody since November 03, 2005;**

defenders:

Derneiko V.V., who presented certificate No. 992 and warrant No. 31,

Vdovina L.G., who presented certificate No. 20 and warrant No. 922,

Moiseevskikh A.G., who presented the certificate. No. 541 and warrant No. 63,

Mironov Yu.K., who presented certificate No. 535, and warrant No. 1512,

Bashkova S. S.,

under the secretary Schwartz E. Yu.,

as well as the legal representative of the minor accused I. M. O.,

civil defendant I. V. I.

Having examined the materials of the criminal case No. 1-143 in relation to B. A. A., accused of committing crimes under Art. Art. 214, 282 h. 1, 282-1 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, D. E. V., I. D. V., accused of committing crimes under Art. Art. 111 h. 3 p. "a", 117 h. 2 p. "e, h", 282-1 h. 2, 116 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, K.A.S. . Art. 111 h. 3 p. "a", 111 h. 2 p. "b, e", 117 h. 2 p. "e, h", 150 h. 1, 150 h. 4, 282-1 h. 2 , 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation,

SET UP:

Defendant B. committed actions aimed at inciting national, racial hatred and insulting human dignity, as well as actions aimed at desecrating buildings.

Defendants K., I., D. inflicted beatings on Mr. Pirnozarov A.R., Altibaev Zh.M., Umurkulov Z.Sh. slight bodily harm, grievous bodily harm to Mr. Ulmasov S.F., I. and D. beat Mr. Dzhomakhmadov M.A., and K. also intentionally caused serious bodily harm to Mr. Dzhomakhmadov M.A., under the following circumstances.

1. In May 2004, B., acting publicly with the aim of inciting national, racial hatred among the population of the city of Berdsk, insulting the human dignity of persons of another nationality, desecrating the facade of a residential building, using black paint, committed actions aimed at inciting hatred towards persons of nationalities of the Caucasian and African states and offending their human dignity, having executed on the facade of house No. A in the city of Berdsk, Novosibirsk Region, an inscription containing calls for the deportation of persons from the Caucasian and African states, realizing that his inscription would be read by the inhabitants of the city of Berdsk. At the same time, some of the letters in the inscription were made in such a way that they resembled fascist signs and symbols.

2. On September 30, 2005, in the daytime, K., I., D. and at least 5 other persons not identified by the investigation gathered at the Vega stadium in Berdsk, where they had previously agreed among themselves on the basis of national hatred and enmity to beat up natives from the Asian republics working in LLC "Domal" on the street. P. d. And the city of Berdsk, because heard from an acquaintance that supposedly workers of Asian nationality, the specified organization, raped a resident of the city of Berdsk. For the indicated purpose, K., I., D. and at least 5 other persons, acting according to a preliminary agreement, pulling the hoods of their jackets over their faces and wrapping their faces in scarves and scarves, deliberately allowing harm to life-threatening health, at about 7 p.m. in the workshop building. Where, having attacked Umurkulov Z.Sh., Pirnazarov A.R., Altibaev Zh.M. and Ulmasova S.F., began to strike them, using unidentified objects as weapons. At the same time, Umurkulov Z.Sh. they hit him on the head with an unspecified object and punched him in the face, and when he fell, they kicked him, shod in heavy boots and with unspecified objects; Pirnazarov A.R. was kicked in the back, Altibaev Zh.M. was kicked in the back, Ulmasov S.F. they punched him in the face, and when he fell, multiple blows: with his hands, feet, shod in heavy boots, and with unidentified objects used as weapons. Pirnazarov and Altibaev managed to escape. As a result of the joint criminal actions of K., D., I. and other persons, the victims: Pirnazarov, Altibaev and Umurkulov were beaten, the victim Ulmasov suffered serious bodily harm in the form of bruises and a head wound, a fracture of the bones of the cranial vault and a contusion of the brain.

3. On October 23, 2005, in the daytime, K., I., D., B., whose case was dismissed due to active repentance, and other persons not identified by the investigation, gathered at the Vega stadium in Berdsk, where they had previously agreed to find and beat the citizens of Asian nationality on the basis of national hatred and enmity. For this purpose, at about 17:00 in the courtyard of house A on the street. P. g. Berdska K., D., I. and 6 other persons not identified by the investigation, having met the citizen of the Republic of Tajikistan Aimatov F.N., acting jointly and in concert, as a single group, motivated by national hatred, in public place, grossly violating public order and expressing obvious disrespect for society, with the aim of causing bodily harm, attacked Aymatov, knocking him down. After that, they began to strike Aimatov with punches and kicks in various parts of the body. As a result of the joint actions of K., D., I. and 6 other persons, unidentified by the investigation, Aimatov suffered: slight bodily harm in the form of bruised facial wounds, as well as bodily injuries in the form of bruising of the face and concussion of the brain, which constitute a single craniocerebral injury, not qualified by the degree of harm to health.

4. Continuing their actions, with the above goal, on October 23, 2005 at about 18:00 near the house A on the street. K. g. Berdsk D., having seen Mr. Dzhomakhmadov M.A. of the Republic of Tajikistan, informed about this by phone I. - on the Republic of Tajikistan Jomahmadova M.A. Acting as a single group, motivated by national hatred, in a public place, grossly violating public order and expressing obvious disrespect for society, with the aim of causing bodily harm, they attacked Dzhomakhmadov. D. kicked him and knocked him down. K., D., I. and 6 other persons, unidentified by the investigation, started kicking Jomahmadov. Another person, unidentified by the investigation, began to strike Jomakhmadov with an unidentified object. At this time, K. deliberately, with the aim of causing grievous bodily harm, with a knife he had, acting out of national hatred, stabbed the lying Dzhomakhmadov at least 7 stabs in the body. As a result of joint actions, I., D., K., caused Dzhomakhmadov bodily injuries that did not cause harm to health: in the form of three abrasions of the chest. K. caused Dzhomakhmadov serious bodily harm, life-threatening in the form of: a penetrating wound to the chest on the right with damage to the lung; slight harm to health in the form of: three wounds of the soft tissues of the chest and one abdomen on the left, two wounds of the soft tissues of the left forearm.

In addition, the preliminary investigation authorities, K., D., I. and B. are accused of the following:

A). In 2004, K., I., D., B. and B. began to meet with residents of the city of Novosibirsk - members of the youth group "Skinheads", that is, an organized extremist community that is supported by nationalist views, is promoting racial superiority, causing national hatred to the inhabitants of the Caucasian, Asian and African states and set themselves the goal of preparing and committing acts of hooliganism, acts of vandalism based on racial and national hatred, and, through violence, expel from Russia people from the Caucasian, Asian and African states, i.e. an organized group of persons for the preparation and commission of crimes motivated by racial hatred, under Art. 148, 149, 213, 214, 243, 244, 280 and 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The community has adopted its own rules and norms of behavior, uniforms and distinctive insignia between members of the community, depending on the time of participation in the activities of the community, for participation in criminal actions.

K., I., D., B. and B. began to hold extremist views, to participate in meetings of an extremist organization in the city of Novosibirsk, to read and distribute literature calling for violence against persons of other races and nationalities, to wear the uniform adopted in community, use and publicly display fascist, nationalist and similar signs and symbols.

In May 2004, B., acting with the aim of propagating his extremist views, inciting hatred and enmity among the population of the city of Berdsk, degrading the human dignity of persons of another nationality, acting publicly, desecrating the facade of a residential building, performed on the facade of the village A of the city of Berdsk Novosibirsk region, an inscription that incites enmity towards people of the nationalities of the Caucasian and African states and offends their human dignity. Thus, B. committed the crimes under Art. 282 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In September 2005, rumors appeared in Berdsk that, allegedly, a native of the Asian state, raped a resident of the city of Berdsk. Using this as a pretext for attacks on people of other nationalities, K., D., and I. informed members of the extremist community "Skinheads" in Novosibirsk about this and agreed that the residents of Novosibirsk would come to Berdsk to jointly conduct actions in Berdsk to beat foreign citizens .

Later, on September 30, 2005, at about 4 p.m. K., D., I., together with a group of unidentified persons, in the premises of the Domal LLC shop on the street. P. d. And the city of Berdsk attacked the citizens of the Republic of Uzbekistan and, acting on the motive of national hatred, committed against Pirnazarov A.R., Altibaev Zh.M. and Umurkulova Z.Sh., a crime under Art. 116 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and against Ulmasov S.F., a crime under Art. 111 h. 3 p. a of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; October 23, 2005, at about 5:00 pm K., D., I., together with a group of unidentified persons, in the courtyard of the village A on the street. P. Berdsk, attacked a citizen of the Republic of Tajikistan - Aimatov F.N. and, acting on the motive of national hatred, committed against him a crime under Art. 117 part 2 p. e, h of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; October 23, 2005, at about 18.00 K., D., I., together with a group of unidentified persons, in the area of ​​the village A on the street. K. city of Berdsk, attacked a citizen of the Republic of Tajikistan - Dzhomakhmadov M.A. and, acting on the motive of national hatred, I., D., unidentified persons committed against Dzhomakhmadov M.A. crime under Art. 116 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and K., committed a crime under Art. 111 h. 2 p. b, e of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. On the same day, at the same time, B. and B. accompanied 2 groups of unidentified persons from the "Skinheads" group through the streets of Berdsk, being conductors, they indicated the places where people of Caucasian and Asian nationalities might appear in order to commit violent acts against them. actions, however, the criminal intent was not brought to the end due to reasons beyond their control, in the deserted places of the city of Berdsk there were no victims for attacks. Thus, K., D., B. and B., I. participated in an extremist community.

These actions of the defendants B., D., I., K. are qualified by the preliminary investigation under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - i.e. participation in an extremist community.

b). In addition, the defendant K. is accused by the preliminary investigation bodies of the fact that, knowing for certain that I. and B. are minors, in order to involve minors in the extremist community, K. began to propagate his nationalist views I. and B., gave for reading extremist literature by the latter, misled them about the superiority of one race over another, under the guise of a meeting of rock music fans, led them to gatherings of the extremist community "Skinheads". Later, underage I. and B., under the influence of K.'s propaganda, became members of the extremist community "Skinheads" and took part in actions to beat people of other nationalities on 23.10.05. g., i.e. committed a crime under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In addition, I. took part in the beating of A.R. Pirnazarov, Zh.M. Altibaev, Z.Sh. Umurkulov, S.F. Ulmasov, F.N. Aimatov, M.A. committed intentional including especially grave crimes under Art. 111 h. 3 p. a, 117 h. 2 p. e, h of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The actions of K. by the preliminary investigation bodies in relation to the minor I. are qualified under Art. Art. 150 h. 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - i.e. involvement of a minor in the commission of a grave and especially grave crime by means of promises and deceit, by a person who has reached the age of 18, in relation to a minor B. under Art. 150 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - involvement of a minor in the commission of a crime by means of promises and deceit, by a person who has reached the age of 18.

Defendant B. partially admitted his guilt, refused to testify. During the preliminary investigation, he also did not give evidence, he was interrogated as a witness, in accordance with Art. 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, these testimonies were not read out at the hearing. At the court session, answering questions, B. explained that indeed in the winter of 2004, out of hooligan motives, he had executed the inscription indicated in the charge on the facade of house No. A in the city of Berdsk. He executed the indicated inscription on his own initiative, he did not coordinate his actions with anyone. In the inscription he made, he called people of Caucasian and Asian nationality "Churki". Having completed the indicated inscription, he territorially designated the place of residence of persons of a different nationality. The literature confiscated from the defendant K., he gave K. to read. This literature was given to him in the city of Novosibirsk in the "Patriots of Russia" party, he was going to become a member of this party, and even wrote an application. The literature, which was confiscated from the defendant D., he did not give him.

Defendant D. partially admitted his guilt, refused to testify. Interrogated during the preliminary investigation, his testimony was read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, in connection with the refusal to testify, testified as follows. In 2004, he met I., nicknamed "Palka", K., nicknamed "Bulldog" and B.. K. explained to him that there was a Slavic Union party, he also gave him 3 brochures to read, among which was "Combat Charter". He did not read this literature, did not attend party meetings, no one campaigned for him. He was not part of this movement. He did wear heavy boots, because it's fashionable. He has acquaintances who consider themselves "skinheads", but he does not consider himself one of them, he has a common view that persons of non-Russian nationality should not live in Russia, since it is these persons who distribute drugs in Russia. They periodically traveled to Novosibirsk, where young people gathered on Lenin Square to support his views. One day, from Sh., with whom he, K. and I. work together, he learned that in the summer of 2005 non-Russian men working at a factory located on the street. Popov, Berdsk, raped a girl, and his son, Sh., was beaten by the same men when he began to stand up for the girl. At the end of September 2005, at about 5 pm, he met K., with whom there were guys from Novosibirsk, he did not know the purpose of the arrival of these guys. He noticed that some guys from Novosibirsk had metal chains on their belts. Everyone gathered at the Vega stadium, where I. was also, there were about 10 people in total. While drinking alcohol, someone began to discuss the issue of beating Sh. Since they knew where these non-Russian men worked, they decided to go and deal with them. To this end, they, divided into groups, went to the plant, located on the street. P. At about 19 pm, they entered the territory of the workshop, where there were four men of non-Russian nationality. He, D., inflicted three blows on one of these men: one kick in the back, a second blow with his hand on the body, and a third kick in the thigh. He didn't beat anyone else. He saw this man being beaten by one of the Novosibirsk guys with his hands and feet on the body and head, while one of the guys was holding the man, and the other was beating him. He, running out of the workshop, saw a non-Russian man lying on the ground, two guys were standing near him, one of them beat the man with a metal chain, but he did not see who it was from the guys.

23.10.05. he met by chance at the railway station with I., with whom there were five other people. Later K. and B. came up with them guys from Novosibirsk, he did not know the purpose of their arrival. After drinking alcohol together at the stadium, they split into groups and went around the city. Near house A on the street. P Mr. Berdsk, everyone ran somewhere, he also ran because of the "herd feeling". He saw that several guys, who, he cannot say, were kicking a man lying on the ground. He, running up to a man, in his opinion, it was a man of non-Russian nationality, also kicked him once with his foot, somewhere in the legs. Whether A. and D. took part in the beating, he does not remember. The beating lasted less than a minute, then everyone, divided into groups, went on. Being on st. K., Berdsk, near one of the private houses, he noticed men of non-Russian nationality, about which he informed I. by telephone. After some time, K., I. and the Novosibirsk guys approached him, there were about 8 people in total. He, D., was the first to run up to the man and kicked him in the shoulder area, and then punched him twice on the shoulder with his fist. Someone next, running up to the man, knocked him down, he, D. hit the man lying on the ground several times on the legs. Then the Novosibirsk guys began to beat the man with their feet and hands on various parts of the body. He saw K. beating this man with his hands. He realized that K. had something in his hands. K. struck the man with the side of his arm, as if with some kind of object. One of the Novosibirsk guys beat the man with a chain. Whether I. participated in the beating of the man, he does not remember. The beating lasted no more than a minute, after which they ran away (case file 180-183 v. 1, case file 87-92 v. 2). At the hearing, defendant D. confirmed the authenticity of his testimony. He does not recognize the claims of the prosecutor, t.to. didn't hurt anyone.

Defendant K. partially admitted his guilt, refused to testify. Interrogated during the preliminary investigation, his testimony was read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, in connection with the refusal to testify, testified as follows. He has acquaintances who call themselves skinheads, but he is not one of them, because. not all of their views are shared. But he believes, just like skinheads, that Russians should live in Russia. He often met in the BEST club with skinheads, in the city of Berdsk there are 5 of them - D., I., and I., he does not know others. From time to time they communicate with informals in Novosibirsk on Lenin Square, where both skinheads and informals gather.

23.10.05. At the railway station, together with D. and I., he met a group of skinheads who had come from Novosibirsk, there were 18-20 of them. Breaking into groups, they went for a walk around the city. When they passed by house A on the street. P., he saw that skinheads from the city of Novosibirsk were beating up a guy of non-Russian nationality. He, approaching a guy of non-Russian nationality, struck him 2 kicks in the back area. Later that day, while at St. K. Berdsk, in a group of guys, among whom were skinheads, he took part in the beating of a man of non-Russian nationality. Basically, this man was beaten by Novosibirsk guys, he, approaching the man, inflicted several blows on his body, where exactly he does not remember. He saw how D., along with the others, kicked a non-Russian man. He did not see any objects, including those resembling a knife, as well as chains, the beating lasted no more than 1-2 minutes. Then they went to the station and left for Novosibirsk. He does not remember how many and where the rest struck the guys of non-Russian nationality. Prior to that, he had not caused any bodily harm to anyone. He usually wears a black jacket and is always shod in berets (case file 173-177 vol. 1). At the hearing, the defendant K. confirmed the authenticity of these testimonies. The claims of the prosecutor for reimbursement of the funds spent on the treatment of the victim Jomahmadova partially recognizes, but Aimatova does not recognize the treatment of the victim. Guilt on charges under Art. 150 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and 150 h. 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not recognize, because did not involve B. and I. in the commission of the crime, did not know about the age of I.

Defendant I. partially admitted his guilt, refused to testify. Interrogated during the preliminary investigation, his testimony was read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, in connection with the refusal to testify, testified as follows. In 2004, he met D., K. and B.. K. told him that he was against persons of non-Russian nationality, K. did not tell him anything about meetings, actions, rallies. K. gave him pamphlets to read, including the Combat Regulations, he, I., leafed through the pamphlet, but did not understand anything. He, I., believes that persons of non-Russian nationality should not live in Russia, but he does not oppose foreign workers. He knows that in Novosibirsk on the square. Lenin often gathers rockers, fans of rock music, informals, where he went on weekends with K., D. and B.

23.10.05. In the afternoon he met K., there were guys from Novosibirsk with him, he realized that they were skinheads, he did not know the purpose of their arrival. Later, D. and B. came up. He saw K. had a knife in a camouflage sheath on his belt, the width of the blade was about 1.5 cm, the handle of the knife was brown. At about 5 pm everyone climbed into the stadium, began to drink beer, after which, breaking into groups, they went to the area of ​​​​ul. P., to house no. A, since D. said that it was there that persons of non-Russian nationality could be located. He, I. with his group lagged behind the rest. Near the village No. A on the street. P., he saw how a group of D. and K. were already running away from the man lying on the ground, he was of non-Russian nationality. After that, they again split into groups, such a command was given by K., and went for a walk around the city. Around 19:00 all groups met at the station. Some time later, D. told him by phone that in the area of ​​st. K., he saw persons of non-Russian nationality, after which everyone went to the street. K. g. Berdsk. D., seeing a non-Russian man, ran up to him and kicked him in the back. He, I., grabbed the man and applied the gripping technique and hit him on the back in the process of grabbing. At this time, the others kicked the man lying on the ground in various parts of the body. He also saw D. kick the man, and a guy from Novosibirsk named "Fritz" beat the man with a metal chain. He himself did not inflict more blows on the man. The beating did not last long, after which they ran away. Later, when they were on the train, he noticed that K. did not have a knife (case sheet 48-52 v. 2). At the hearing, the defendant I. confirmed the authenticity of these testimonies. The claims of the prosecutor does not recognize, t.to. didn't hurt anyone. On the 2nd episode, he testified to defense questions that he did not strike anyone, was on the territory of the plant, did not see the actions of other persons.

The guilt of the defendants is confirmed by the evidence presented by the prosecution.

For the 1st episode.

• the report of the inspection of the scene, during which the inscription "Chocks of the mountain, Negroes of palm trees, Russia - Russians" was found on the facade of building No. 69 of the microdistrict of Berdsk. The letters "s" in the words Russia and Russian have been changed and look like a stylized Latin letter "s" (v. 1 pp. 112-114).

Thus, the court, analyzing the evidence collected in the case in their entirety, comes to the conclusion that the defendant B.'s guilt has been proven in this episode. The court qualifies his actions in this episode: under Art. 282 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - i.e. actions aimed at inciting hatred, enmity and humiliation of the dignity of a group of persons on the basis of race and nationality, committed publicly; under Art. 214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - vandalism, i.e. desecration of buildings.

Defendant B., deliberately in order to incite enmity towards the people of the Caucasian and African states, degrading their human dignity, made on the facade of a residential apartment building located in a residential microdistrict, the inscription "Chocks of the mountain, blacks of palm trees, Russia - Russians." The letters "s" in the words Russia and Russian are changed and look like a stylized Latin letter "s". Thus, he publicly called on the inhabitants of the city of Berdsk to have a negative attitude towards persons of other nationalities, inciting enmity towards them, calling for their illegal deportation from the Russian Federation, as evidenced by the meaning of the above phrase. At the same time, having executed the indicated inscription with black paint on the facade of a residential building, he desecrated a public building - which is in municipal ownership. In this case, the court concludes that these actions B. constitute an ideal set of crimes under Art. Art. 282 h. 1 and 214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

According to the 2nd episode, the guilt of the defendants D., I. and K. is confirmed:

The testimony of the victim Umurkulov Z.Sh. at the preliminary investigation, which were announced at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, due to the failure to establish his location, who showed that he was a citizen of the Republic of Uzbekistan, having arrived to work in the city of Berdsk, he got a job in LLC "Domal" 09/30/05. he, along with Ulmasov, Altibaev and Pirnazarov, were at work. At about 19:00, 12 or 13 guys ran into the premises of the Domal LLC shop, they had glass bottles, wooden sticks and metal rods in their hands. The guys, without saying anything, began to beat them; during the beating, the guys did not express any demands. One of the guys hit him on the head with a glass bottle, then someone kicked him in the leg, from which he fell face down. When he tried to stand up, one of the guys hit him in the jaw. From the blow he fell, after which the guys began to kick him on the head and various parts of the body, beat him with wooden sticks, metal rods and bottles. He remembers being beaten up by four or five guys. The beating lasted about five minutes, after which the guys ran away. When he got up, he saw Ulmasov lying on the ground, his face was covered in blood. He remembered that the guys were dressed in black leather jackets, their faces were covered with scarves, he would not be able to identify the guys. He asks to bring the perpetrators to criminal responsibility (case file 34-35 v. 1).

The testimony of the victim Pirnazarova A.R. at the preliminary investigation, which were announced at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish his location, which showed that 30.09.05. At about 19:00, guys ran into the premises of the Domal LLC shop, there were 12-13 of them. In the hands of the guys were glass bottles, wooden sticks and metal rods. The guys immediately began to beat them, while the guys did not demand anything, they did not make any claims against them. His few guys began to be kicked and hands on the back. Frightened, he ran away from the factory. When he returned, he saw that Umurkulov and Ulmasov were severely beaten, the guys did not inflict bodily harm on him. The guys were dressed in black leather jackets, their faces were covered with scarves, he would not be able to identify the guys. He asks to bring the perpetrators to criminal responsibility (case files 37-38 v. 1).

The testimony of the victim Altibaeva Zh.M. at the preliminary investigation, which were announced at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish his whereabouts, which showed that on September 30, 2005, at about 7 p.m., he was beaten by unknown guys who were armed with metal rods, bottles and wooden sticks. He was kicked once in the back by a guy. Frightened, he ran away from the factory. When he returned, he saw that Ulmasov was lying on the ground, his face was covered in blood. He could not identify the attacking guys, they were dressed in black leather jackets, their faces were covered with scarves. He asks to bring the perpetrators to criminal liability (case sheets 41-42 v. 1).

The testimony of the victim Ulmasov S.F. at the preliminary investigation, which were announced at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish his location, which showed that 30.09.05. At about 7 p.m., he was beaten up by unknown guys on the territory of the Domal LLC shop in Berdsk. One of the boys punched him in the face. From the received blow, he fell, after which several guys began to beat him at once, they beat him on various parts of the body. He immediately lost consciousness. He does not remember the guys who beat him up, their faces were all covered with scarves (case sheet 53-54 vol. 1).

The testimony of witness B., who testified that 30.09.05. he, together with K., D., was at the stadium, where there were many "informal" guys. A week before, his colleague Sh. told that guys of non-Russian nationality beat his son, because the son began to stand up for the girl who was raped by these guys. After about an hour, the whole crowd went towards the coast, he guessed that there would be a fight, that the crowd was going to beat someone, because. everyone was aggressive, in the hands of the guys he saw chains. The crowd moved to the plant, located on the street. P., along the way, someone from the crowd shouted: "Someone will feel bad now." He understood that there would be a fight in connection with the beating of Sh. and these men, who had beaten Sh., were working at this factory, where the crowd had gone. He did not take part in the fight, having reached the gates of the plant, he left, and the crowd of guys headed for the gates of the shop. In the hands of K., I. and D. he did not see anything, K. did not shout out any phrases.

According to the testimony of witness M., who testified that he knew the defendants, they gathered at the Giant plant, as fans of rock music. At the end of September 2005, he was at the Vega stadium, where K., D., I. and a crowd of about 15 guys also gathered, he knows that the guys came from Novosibirsk, he talked to one of them. Everyone was dressed in heavy boots and black jackets. Then everyone began to gather somewhere and he also went with the crowd, which went to the street. P. g. Berdsk. On the way, everyone began to divide into groups, a guy named K., with whom he was talking, explained to him that they were "skinheads" and that they were going to beat non-Russians. Near school No. B near the plant, he realized that they were going to beat someone, but they didn’t tell him who and why. He did not see guns (sticks, chains), the guys were shod in heavy boots, "skinheads" walk in such boots, so he decided that the guys were "skinheads" and were going to beat non-Russians. They entered the territory of the plant, he remained on the street, and the crowd entered the workshop, he heard screams and the noise of a fight. Then everyone ran out of the workshop and ran in different directions. He did not see anything in K.'s hands, he did not shout out slogans. D. and K. were not dressed as skinheads.

The testimony of witness Sh., who testified that he knew from his son that persons of non-Russian nationality working at the plant on st. P. g. Berdsk raped a girl. When the son began to stand up for the girl, "Uzbeks" attacked him and beat him. He talked about it at work. D., I. and K. work with him. He cannot say to whom exactly at work he told about this.

The testimony of witness Sh., who testified that in September 2005, near the house No. A on the street. P. g. Berdska met a familiar girl who explained to him that she had been raped. At the same time, a man of non-Russian nationality was next to her. The girl pointed to this man, explaining that this man had raped her. After that, the man ran away towards the plant. After some time, three or four men came out of the plant and beat him. He told his father about what had happened.

The testimony of witness G. at the preliminary investigation, which were read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish her whereabouts, which showed that 03.09.05. near house A on the street. P. she was raped by persons of non-Russian nationality who work in a workshop for the production of paving slabs on the street. P. She told her friend Sh. about what happened, who went to the workshop to sort things out, but the non-Russians beat him. She did not report the rape to the police, because she was afraid of publicity (case file 115-118 v. 1).

The testimony of witness B. at the preliminary investigation, which was read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish his whereabouts, who testified that in early September 2005, at the request of his acquaintance G., he dealt with persons of non-Russian nationality working in the workshop for the production of paving slabs on the street. P. g. Berdsk. Since G. reported that they raped her. The rape was not reported to the police, because G. did not want publicity. (case sheet 120-121 v. 1).

In addition, the guilt of the defendants D., I. and K. in this episode is confirmed:

- the protocol of inspection of the scene, during which, in the workshop for the production of paving slabs, located on the street. P. d. And red-brown spots, scrap metal (case file 4-9 v. 1) were found on the floor, which objectively confirms the fact that the defendants beat the victims, while using objects used as weapons.

- a message from a medical institution that 30.09.05. at 22 o'clock. 35 minutes later, Ulmasov S.F. was admitted to the medical institution. with a diagnosis of "closed craniocerebral injury, bruised wound of the scalp", (case file 10-11 v. 1),

- a message from a medical institution that 30.09.05. at 22 o'clock. 30 min. Umurkulov Z. was admitted to a medical institution with a diagnosis of "closed fracture of the lower jaw" (case file 12 v. 1),

- a certificate from a medical institution stating that 30.09.05. d. Umurkulov Z.Sh. was admitted to the emergency room, who underwent an X-ray, on the basis of which a diagnosis of "open fracture of the lower jaw" was made (case file 80-81 v. 1);

- the conclusion of the forensic medical examination, according to which Ulmasov S.F. received injuries in the form of bruises and a head wound, a fracture of the bones of the cranial vault and a contusion of the brain. These bodily injuries were caused by a blunt solid object (objects) and constitute a single craniocerebral injury, which is life-threatening, thereby causing serious bodily harm to the victim (case sheet 69-70 v. 1). This objectively confirms the credibility of the testimonies of the victims.

Answers to a separate order (case sheet 131-135 v. 2) according to which 30.09.05. in the period from 19:00 to 20:00, i.e. during the commission of the crime, defendants K., D., I. repeatedly called each other and other persons on mobile phones, which indicates a preliminary conspiracy to commit a crime.

- the protocol of the confession of the defendant K., in which he reports that he met 4-5 guys from Novosibirsk at the station, and later I., D., B. and M.. They went to the stadium, where they stood to drink beer. There they told Novosibirsk that on the day of the city, a "non-Russian" raped a girl. He works in a workshop for the production of paving slabs. Having broken up into 2-3 groups, they advanced to the plant. Near the plant, he phoned other groups and began to enter the plant. They thought that there would be 10-12 "non-Russians". There were 4 of them. One immediately ran for some extension in the workshop. I. and he ran after him. "Khach" ran around the annex and hid. He ran around the annex, but there was no "khach" there, it was dark. He returned to the others. They beat three "non-Russians". One of the Novosibirsks beat one of the "khachis" with a chain, the rest with his hands and feet. He managed to catch one of the "hachi", which escaped, in the leg area, but he did not fall, but ran on. Then everyone began to scatter in groups (case sheet 94-95 v. 1). At the hearing, the defendant K. confirmed the authenticity of his appearance.

- the protocol of the confession of the defendant D.., in which he reports that around September 2005, in the evening, he, I., K. and 5-6 other people from Novosibirsk drank beer at the stadium. While drinking beer, they remembered the incident with the son of their employee Sh., who had a fight with non-Russians who raped the girl. There was an offer to avenge him and go deal with the non-Russians. It was known that non-Russians were working in the workshop for the production of paving slabs on the street. P. Two groups advanced there. K. was walking in one, he was walking with another group. On st. P united in one group. Their faces were covered with scarves and bandanas. He put on a hood. When they entered the gate, they began to run. There were 4 people in the shop. He chased one and kicked it. The man ran faster. He lost his balance and stopped to avoid falling. The man was stopped by a Novosibirsk guy who beat him with his hands. He ran up to them and hit the non-Russian a couple of times with his hands and kicked him in the thigh, from which he almost fell. The Novosibirsk guy kicked him and the non-Russian fell. Then shouts were heard: "Let's go" and everyone ran to the exit. A man was lying at the exit and there were a couple of guys next to him, one of whom struck with a chain. He ran into the grove, phoned K. and realized that he was behind the building of the street. P. d. A. They united, saw off the Novosibirsk guys and went home (case sheet 81-82 v. 2);

Thus, analyzing the evidence collected in the case in their totality, the court concludes that the guilt of the defendants K., D., I. has been proven in the 2nd episode.

Defendants K., I., D. met on September 30, 2005 at the Vega stadium in Berdsk with other persons and agreed in advance to beat the citizens of Asian nationality working in OOO D. on st. P d. And the city of Berdsk on the basis of national hatred and enmity, using as a pretext the rumors that these persons had raped a girl. At the same time, the intention of all the defendants was that they would jointly and in concert beat the victims. In addition, all the defendants were aware of the social danger of their actions, foresaw the possibility of inflicting grievous bodily harm on the victims, but were indifferent to this. This is evidenced by the fact that all the defendants and at least 5 other persons not identified by the investigation intended to beat the victims, i.e. the attackers were at least 8 people, while they realized that even if each one inflicted one blow, with a hand or foot, this could already cause serious bodily harm. But besides this, the defendants and 5 other persons armed themselves with various objects: metal rods and chains, wooden sticks, glass bottles, intending to use these objects as weapons, which also testifies to the preliminary conspiracy of all the defendants to harm the health of the victims, in including the hard one. Further, the defendants and 5 other persons, divided into groups and having agreed that each of them would take part in the beating of the victims, went to LLC "D." Berdsk, where, breaking into the workshop, they began to deliberately beat the victims, inflicting multiple blows on them, including various objects: metal rods, chains, wooden sticks and glass bottles, using these objects as weapons. At the same time, the court proceeds from the testimony of the victims Umurkulov, Pirnazarov, Altibaev and Ulmasov, which the court has no reason not to trust, which showed that the attackers had various objects in their hands; wooden sticks, metal rods, chains and glass bottles that all the defendants and persons unidentified by the investigation took part in the beating. At the same time, as the victims of the beating explained, the defendants and persons unidentified by the investigation did not express any demands and claims, which indicates the motive for committing the crime on the basis of ethnic hatred and enmity. Also, the guilt of the defendants is confirmed by the totality of evidence, the analysis of which is given above.

Thus, by joint deliberate actions, the defendants and at least 5 other persons inflicted beatings on the victims Pirnazarov A.R., Altibaev and Umurkulov, the victim Ulmasov S.F. serious harm to health on the basis of danger to life.

The testimony of the defendants D., I. and K., who deny participation in the beating and beating of Umurkulov, Pirnazarov, Altibaev and causing grievous bodily harm to the victim Ulmasov, the court regards as the desire of the defendants to avoid criminal liability for their deeds and recognizes in this part the testimony of the defendants unreliable .

In addition, the court concludes that the actions of the defendants D., I. and K. in this episode were covered by a single intent, they committed one crime against three victims: Umurkulov, Altibaev and Pirnazarov and therefore qualify as one episode.

The actions of the defendants D., I. and K. on the 2nd episode, the court qualifies: in terms of beating the victims: Umurkulov, Altibaev and Pirnazarov under Art. 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - beatings that caused physical pain, but did not entail the consequences specified in Art. 115 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, regarding the beating of the victim Ulmasov S.F. - according to Art. 111 part 3 paragraph a of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm, dangerous to human life, committed on the basis of national hatred, by a group of persons by prior agreement.

The court excludes from the charge of the defendants on this episode the qualifying sign "organized group", based on the following. In accordance with Part 3 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a crime is recognized as committed by an organized group if it is committed by a stable group of persons who have previously united to commit one or more crimes. Defendants K., D., I. at the preliminary investigation on this episode explained that they met with the guys from Novosibirsk at the stadium, drank beer, did not specifically name which of the guys was with them. In the process of drinking alcohol, they remembered the incident with the beating of Sh. and went to the factory to beat "non-Russians" for it, i.e. the commission of a crime was not planned in advance, they did not unite in a stable group in advance, but agreed in advance on the commission of a crime. No evidence to the contrary has been presented by the prosecution.

According to the 3rd and 4th episodes, the guilt of the defendants D., I., K., is confirmed:

The testimony of the victim Aymatova F.M. at the preliminary investigation, which were announced at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in connection with the failure to establish his whereabouts, which showed that in June 2005 he had come to Berdsk to work. He had no registration in Berdsk, he lived at a construction site where he worked as a plasterer, he does not know the address, it is somewhere near the river. He had no conflicts with the residents of Berdsk and Novosibirsk. He does not remember the date or month of the incident. He remembers that in the evening he left the construction site for a kiosk, which is located near a multi-storey building. In the courtyard of the house there were people, children. When he was walking away from the kiosk, someone behind him pulled his clothes, from which he turned around and immediately received a blow in the forehead. Who beat him, how many people, who specifically hit him and where, he cannot say. He doesn't remember anything else. He came to his senses only in the hospital. Why he was beaten, he does not know. Since he had many bruises on his body and head, he concluded that he had been beaten more after the blow. He asks to bring to justice the persons who beat him (case files 152-153 v. 2).

The testimony of the victim Dzhomakhmadov MA, during the preliminary investigation, which were read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, with the consent of the parties, in accordance with paragraph 3 of part 2 of Art. 281 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, who testified that he came to Berdsk in 2004 to work. Lived without registration on the street. K. In the evening of 10/24/05. he and his friend R. were on the street. K. g. Berdsk. He suddenly felt a blow to his back. He saw that several men ran up to him, R. ran away and was knocked down. He got up and tried to run away, but was knocked down again. He fell face down and several people started beating him and kicking him. Immediately they began to stab me in the back with a knife. As a result, he received 6 stab wounds in the back and 1 stab wound in the arm. In addition, he was beaten with a hard, stick-like object. They beat him silently, several people, how many he did not see. They beat him for 2-3 minutes, and then they ran away (case file 203-204 v. 1).

The testimony of witness A., who testified that 23.10.06. between 17-00 and 18-00 hours from the window of his house No. A on the street. In the city of Berdsk, she saw a crowd of guys from 9-10 people. First, the guys knocked down one man, beat him with their feet and hands. She did not see any objects in their hands, the beating lasted about 15 minutes. All the guys took part in the beating of the man, no one stood aside. Then the guys began to move away from the victim, and the guys from this company began to approach him one by one, stood on the victim and jumped on him, after which all the guys ran away. A company of guys approached the victim as a single group and they also left, separate groups from this company did not stand out. After she went to the victim, it was a man of Asian nationality, his face was all swollen, he was covered in blood.

According to the testimony of witness R., at the preliminary investigation, which was read out at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, due to the impossibility of establishing his whereabouts, this circumstance was recognized by the court as extraordinary, preventing the appearance in court, which showed that he lived together with Dzhomakhmadov. 23.10.05. g. about 18 hours 10 min. he and Dzhomakhmadov were on the street. K., near house A or B. At that time, a group of guys approached them, there were 12 or 15 of them. The guys, without saying anything, approached them and one of the guys, approaching Jomakhmadov, struck him with his hand on the body, from which he fell to the ground. He, R, ran into the house, and Dzhomakhmadov began to run away from the guys, a crowd of these guys ran after him. What happened next, he did not see. When he went outside a few minutes later, no one was there. Approaching his house, he saw that Jomakhmadov was sitting on the ground. He did not see knives in the hands of these guys. He will not be able to identify any of the guys (case file 151-152 v. 1).

According to the testimony of witness B., during the preliminary investigation, which was read out at the request of the prosecutor, in connection with his failure to appear, since he is serving in the ranks of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, this circumstance was recognized by the court as extraordinary, preventing it from appearing in court. The witness explained that on October 23 or 24, 2005 he did not remember the exact date, at about 5 or 6 pm he was on the street. K. g. Berdsk. He saw a group of guys, by their clothes he realized that they were skinheads. One of the guys, thin build, went to the house number B, where there was a man of non-Russian nationality. Approaching the man, the guy delivered one kick to the shoulder area, from which the man fell to the ground. When the man wanted to get up and run away, the same guy hit him and the man fell down again. At that moment, the rest of the guys ran up and started punching and kicking the man's body. At one of the guys, he saw a metal chain on which there was a metal ball. The whole beating lasted several minutes, after which the guys ran towards the station. What bodily injuries the man had, he did not see (case file 166-167 v. 1).

According to the testimony of witness P., during the preliminary investigation, which were read out at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, due to the impossibility of establishing his whereabouts, the court recognized this circumstance as extraordinary, preventing him from appearing in court. The witness testified that on 23.10.05 he was near the house No. B on the street. K. g. Berdsk. He saw that a crowd of guys was moving from the side of the station, there were 10-15 of them. Passing by, the guys pushed him, and also pushed the Tajik, who was standing nearby. He, P., fell to the ground, so he did not see how the guys beat the man. When he got up, the guys had already run away. He will not be able to identify the guys (case file 184 - 185 v. 1).

The testimony of witness O., at the preliminary investigation, which were read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, due to the impossibility of establishing his whereabouts, this circumstance was recognized by the court as extraordinary, preventing the appearance in court, which showed that 23.10.05. he traveled to Novosibirsk with a group of informals. There were also skinheads with them, about 5 people, among them was a "Bulldog" named A., "Jonik". Having returned from Novosibirsk, the skinheads went towards the street. B Berdsk. He did not hear from them about cases of beating of non-Russians (case file 168-169 v. 1)

The testimony of witness Z. at the preliminary investigation, which was read out at the hearing at the request of the prosecutor, due to the impossibility of establishing his whereabouts, this circumstance was recognized by the court as extraordinary, preventing the appearance in court, which showed that 23.10.05. g., at about 18.00 he and B. were on the street. To the city of Berdsk. Near the house number A on the street. To were men of Tajik nationality. At this time, he saw that a crowd of guys was coming from the side of the station, there were about 8-10 of them. All were in boots like "bretsa" or "grinders". He realized that they were "skinheads" and decided to go home. When he entered the house, he saw how one of the "skinheads" ran up and kicked this man on the back, after which the man fell. At this time, the rest of the "skinheads" ran to the man. He didn't see anything else, only heard the man screaming. When everything was quiet, he went out and saw a man lying on the ground (v. 1 case sheet 219-220).

The testimony of Zh., interrogated at the court session as an expert at the request of the defense, who testified that he had carried out a forensic medical examination of Mr Dzhomakhmadov M.A., whom he had personally examined during the examination. During the examination, it was found that the victim Dzhomakhmadov suffered bodily injuries in the form of a penetrating wound to the chest on the right, abdomen, and left forearm. These bodily injuries were caused by a piercing-cutting object. When striking a person's body with a metal ball with pointed metal teeth, a piercing wound remains on the body, and not a piercing-cut one.

In addition to this, the guilt of the defendants in episodes 3 and 4 is confirmed:

- statement by Aimatov F.N. that on 23.10.05. in the courtyard of the village. And on the street. He was beaten by unknown persons and caused bodily harm. He wants to bring the perpetrators to justice (v. 2 case file 143);

- the conclusion of the forensic medical examination, according to which Aimatov F.N. received injuries in the form of bruises and bruised wounds of the head, concussion of the brain. These bodily injuries were caused by a blunt hard object(s). Bodily injuries in the form of bruised facial wounds resulted in a short-term health disorder, thereby causing slight harm to Aimatov's health. Bodily injuries in the form of bruising of the face and concussion of the brain constitute a single craniocerebral injury, which can be qualified only after the end of treatment and the provision of relevant medical documents (case file 163-164 v. 2), which objectively confirms the reliability of the testimony of the victim Aimatov and witness A., who witnessed the beating of the victim Aymatov.

- a message from a medical institution that 23.10.05. Mr. Dzhomakhmadov N.A. was admitted to the medical institution at 20:30. with a diagnosis of "penetrating stab wound of the chest on the right, multiple stab wounds of the torso" (v. 1 case sheet 142),

- the report of the inspection of the scene, during which the room was examined in house 42 on the street. To the city of Berdsk, the clothes of Dzhomakhmadov M.A. were seized. (v. 1 l.d. 147-149),

- the conclusion of the trace examination, according to which Dzhomakhmadova M.A. there are injuries, of which 3 are formed by an object with a sharp end, a sharp blade and a blunt butt, for example, a knife with a blade width at the immersion level of at least 21 mm, 2 injuries are stab-shaped and formed by an object having a sharp end with an object width at the immersion level 10-12 mm (case sheet 209-212 v. 1);

- the conclusion of the forensic medical examination, according to which Dzhomakhmadov M.A. received bodily injuries in the form of a penetrating wound of the chest on the right with damage to the lung, wounds of the soft tissues of the chest (3) and abdomen (1) on the left, wounds of the soft tissues of the left forearm (2), abrasions of the chest (3). Bodily injuries in the form of a penetrating wound to the chest on the right rear caused by a piercing and cutting object, is life-threatening, thereby causing serious bodily harm to the victim. Bodily injuries in the form of wounds of the soft tissues of the chest on the left (3), abdomen (1) and left forearm (2) were caused by a piercing and cutting object (objects), which resulted in a short-term health disorder, thereby the victim suffered slight harm to health. Thus, the victim was inflicted 10 (ten) bodily injuries: seven with a piercing and cutting object (objects) (case sheet 131-114 v. 2). The indicated conclusions of the examinations objectively confirm that the victim Dzhomakhmadov suffered at least 7 stab wounds.

- a confession to K., in which he reported that 24.10.05. he, together with a group of guys from the city of Novosibirsk, as well as I. and D., split into groups, walked around the city. Passing by house number A on the street. P. Berdsk, he saw that the guys were beating someone, he and his group ran to the man, but when he ran to this place, all the guys were already running in different directions. After that, he and his group went on. Along the way, he met a group of Eugene. When he was at the station, he saw that everyone was running down the street, he ran after them. Seeing that some peasant was being beaten, he was seized by the feeling of the crowd and he poked the peasant 2-3 times in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe body, but did not want him to die. Before that, one of the Novosibirsk guys beat the man with a dog chain. Then they ran off to the train. In the train, he threw a knife (case sheet 63-64 v. 2). At the hearing, the defendant K. confirmed the authenticity of the confession;

- the confession of the defendant I., in which he reported that in October 2005 he, together with a group of guys from the city of Novosibirsk, D. and K., divided into groups, went to the street. P. g. Berdsk, where non-Russians live. There were 3 people in each group, K. and D. walked in front. And he and a group of guys lagged behind them. Then he saw that the guys from Novosibirsk, seeing a man of non-Russian nationality, began to beat him, A. joined this beating with a group of D. He and his group of guys did not get involved in a fight. Further, D. with a group of guys went to the private sector on the street. K., where he later approached at the request of D., who pointed out to him the persons of non-Russian nationality who were standing not far from them. They approached the guys and D. kicked one of them, this man ran in his direction and he, I., grabbed him by the collar and threw him to the ground, hit him once on the shoulder, after which he ran away, and the guys from Novosibirsk, A. and Zh. continued to beat non-Russian men. He saw that one of the guys had a chain, this guy was hitting the man's back with the chain. K. had a penknife with a wooden handle in a khaki sheath. When, after the beating, he met K. in the train, he did not see a knife on him (case sheet 45-47 v. 2). At the hearing, the defendant confirmed the authenticity of the confession.

Answers to a separate order (case sheet 131-135 v. 2) according to which 23.10.05. in the period from the beginning of the 17th to the beginning of the 19th hour., i.e. during the commission of the crimes, the defendants K., D., I. repeatedly called each other and other persons on mobile phones, which indicates a preliminary conspiracy to commit crimes.

Thus, analyzing the evidence collected in the case in their totality, the court concludes that the guilt of the defendants K., D., I. has been proven in the 3rd and 4th episodes.

Defendants K., I., D. 23.10.05. in the daytime, having met with other persons at the Vega stadium in Berdsk, they previously agreed among themselves to find and beat citizens of Asian nationality, on the basis of national hatred and enmity. This is confirmed by further joint actions of the defendants and other persons not identified by the investigation. For this purpose, the defendants K., I., D. and other persons met and jointly beat the citizen of the Republic of Tajikistan Aimatov, inflicting on him the bodily injuries indicated above, which caused minor bodily harm. The fact that all these defendants and other persons beat the victim Aimatov on the basis of national hatred is confirmed by the evidence, the analysis of which is given above. So the victim Aimatov testified that he was beaten for no reason. Witness A. testified that 9-10 guys beat the victim, and they beat everyone, no one stood aside. During the preliminary investigation, the defendants themselves did not deny that they had beaten the victims motivated by ethnic hatred. At the same time, the defendants K., D., I. did not deny that they were near the victim Aymatov. K. and D. testified that they had struck the victim Aymatov, I. denied that he had taken part in beating him. However, the court, based on the totality of evidence, the analysis of which is given above, comes to the conclusion that it has been proved that these defendants and other persons jointly beat the victim Aimatov and jointly caused him slight bodily harm. The defendants and other persons, being in a public place, in the presence of other citizens, grossly violated public order and expressed obvious disrespect for society, beating the victim Aimatov, i.e. acted out of hooligan motives, motivated by national hatred. The actions of the defendants I., K., D. the court qualifies for the 3rd episode under Art. 115 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - intentional infliction of minor bodily harm that caused a short-term health disorder, committed out of hooligan motives.

The actions of the defendants in this episode were qualified by the preliminary investigation bodies under Art. 117 h. 2 p. e, h of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as torture, i.e. infliction of physical suffering by systematic beatings and other violent acts, if this did not entail the consequences specified in Art. Art. 111 and 112 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed by an organized group of persons, motivated by national hatred. At the court session, it was established that the defendants K., D. and I. caused slight harm to the victim Aymatov's health, acting simultaneously and once. Since torture as a systematic method of inflicting beatings is understood as repeated, at least three times, their commission, such actions do not imply their simultaneous commission, but repetition and some length in time, so the court came to the conclusion that the actions of the defendants were reclassified. These actions of the defendants are qualified by the court as indicated above under Art. 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The court also excludes from the charge the defendants that they acted as an organized group, since the prosecution did not present evidence confirming this. At the preliminary investigation, even all the participants in the beating of Aymatov were not identified, which indicates that it does not indicate the stability of the group.

The court qualifies the actions of the defendants D. and I. on the 4th episode under Art. 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - beatings that caused physical pain, but did not entail the consequences specified in Art. 115 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the actions of the defendant K. in this episode under Art. under Art. 111 part 2 p. "e" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm, dangerous to human life, committed on the basis of national hatred.

Defendants D., I. and 6 other persons, acting as a single group motivated by national hatred, with the aim of inflicting bodily harm, attacked Dzhomakhmadov, inflicting beatings on the latter. At the same time, the defendants D. and I. do not deny that they hit the victim Dzhomakhmadov, which is confirmed by the testimony of the victim Dzhomakhmadov, who explained that all the people who attacked him took part in his beating. In addition, from the testimony of witnesses: R., Z., B., it was established that all the defendants and 6 persons unidentified by the investigation took part in the beating of the victim Dzhomakhmadov. The testimonies of the defendants D. and I. are objectively confirmed by the totality of the evidence collected in the case, the analysis of which is given above.

In addition, K., acting deliberately, with the aim of causing grievous bodily harm to the victim, with a knife he had, acting out of national hatred, stabbed the lying Dzhomakhmadov at least 7 times in the body with a knife. By his actions, K. caused Dzhomakhmadov serious bodily harm, life-threatening. The intent of the defendant K. to cause grievous bodily harm to the victim is evidenced, in particular, by the method and instrument of the crime, the nature and localization of the bodily injuries - stabbing the victim's vital organs with a knife. Defendant K. does not deny inflicting stab wounds on the victim Dzhomakhmadov, explaining that he "poked the peasant 2-3 times with a fold in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe body, but did not want him to die. Before that, one of the Novosibirsk guys beat the man with a dog chain."

The court recognizes the testimony of K. in terms of inflicting no more than 3 stabs on the victim as unreliable, they are refuted by the totality of evidence collected in the case, including objective evidence - the conclusion of the examinations, the analysis of which is given above. In addition, the defendant's allegations that the bodily injuries to the victim could have been caused by an unidentified person who beat the victim with a metal ball with pointed metal teeth are untenable and are refuted by the totality of evidence collected in the case. So, according to the forensic medical report, the victim Dzhomakhmadov suffered 7 bodily injuries with a piercing and cutting object. At the court session, forensic expert Zh. explained that during the examination it was established that the victim Dzhomakhmadov had suffered bodily injuries in the form of a penetrating wound to the chest on the right, abdomen, and left forearm. These bodily injuries were caused by a piercing-cutting object. When striking a person's body with a metal ball with pointed metal teeth, a piercing wound remains on the body, and not a piercing-cut one. Thus, the court, based on the totality of evidence, the analysis of which is given above, based on the nature and location of the bodily injuries inflicted on the victim, concludes that the cause of serious harm to the health of the victim Jomakhmadov was the actions of the defendant, namely, the defendant stabbed in soft tissues of the chest on the left, abdomen and left forearm.

However, the court excludes from the charge of the defendant K. on this episode the qualifying sign of paragraph b of part 2 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - "with special cruelty and torment for the victim." The court came to this conclusion on the basis of the following. This qualifying feature is present in the actions of the perpetrator, in particular in cases where, immediately before the commission of the crime or in the process of its commission, the victim was subjected to torture, torture or mockery of the victim, or when the infliction of grievous bodily harm was committed in a way that is known to the perpetrator with causing the victim special suffering (causing a large amount of bodily harm, using a painfully acting poison, burning alive, prolonged deprivation of food, water, etc.). In this case, the actions of Kalinin, inflicting stab wounds to the victim, which resulted in the infliction of grievous bodily harm, were not associated with the infliction of special torment and suffering on the victim. The number of blows inflicted does not indicate that the victim experienced special suffering and torment at that moment, and the victim Dzhomakhmadov does not say this in his testimony. In addition, no evidence was presented at the hearing that the intent of the defendant K. covered the infliction of harm to the health of the victim with particular cruelty and torment.

In addition, the court excludes defendants K., D., I. from the charge of beating the victims with boots with metal inserts, since the prosecution did not provide evidence for this.

Defendants B., D., I. and K. are accused by the bodies of preliminary investigation of committing a crime under charge episode a), which is indicated above.

The court, having examined the evidence cited in the indictment and presented by the public prosecutor at the hearing, in confirming the guilt of the defendants B., D., I., K. in the commission of the specified crime, comes to the conclusion that the evidence presented, both individually and and taken together do not give grounds for concluding that defendants B., D., I., K. are guilty of the said crime. The court came to this conclusion on the basis of the following.

Defendants B., D., I., and K. did not plead guilty to committing the crime under episode a) and gave the testimony indicated above.

The bodies of preliminary investigation and the public prosecutor presented the following evidence in support of the guilt of the defendants B., D., I., K. in the commission of the crime, charged under episode a).

The preliminary investigation, as evidence confirming the guilt of the defendants on the episode of the accusation a) presented the testimony of B., interrogated during the preliminary investigation as a witness. This evidence cannot be used as the basis for the verdict, since B. actually testified as a suspect, he was not explained his right, provided for in paragraph 2 of part 4 of Art. 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, this evidence, in accordance with 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, is inadmissible and cannot be used as the basis for a guilty verdict.

The testimony of witness Z., who testified that he knew about the organization of "skinheads" from the media, did not hear anything from the defendants about this organization, did not notice that the defendants were talking to each other on this topic. The defendants did indeed wear heavy boots and short black jackets. it's fashionable. Since he knows from the media that "skinheads" dress like this, he concluded that the defendants are "skinheads". Under him, the defendants did not promote nationalist views. He also knows that the defendants constantly gathered at the BEST club in Berdsk. That the defendants are "skinheads" is his assumption, he cannot reliably explain whether the defendants are "skinheads".

Testimony of witness Sh., who testified that he knows about the organization of "skinheads", this organization promotes nationalist views, but he did not communicate with the defendants on this topic. He knows that "skinheads" wear certain clothes: black collarless jackets, it was in such jackets that the defendants were constantly wearing. He refers to "skinheads" only K., because. it was he who told him that he did not like persons of non-Russian nationality.

Testimony of witness B., who testified that he knew I., K. and D., together with them he often visited the club "BEST" in Berdsk. In 2004, in the city of Berdsk, a fashion for "skinhead" clothes appeared, many guys began to wear rolled up trousers, high boots, and cut their hair short. Then in the club someone gave him a book about "skinheads". In Novosibirsk, he saw real "skinheads", and our guys bear little resemblance to them. He did not participate in meetings of "skinheads" and no one agitated him to attend these meetings. He works together with D. and K.. From a work acquaintance, Sh., he, D. and K. learned that persons of non-Russian nationality allegedly raped the girl, and his son, who stood up for her, was beaten. A few days later, he came to the stadium where K., D. and many "informal" guys were. Among these guys, he saw those whom he considers real "skinheads". He came to this conclusion because. earlier in Novosibirsk I saw "skinheads", and these guys at the stadium were also dressed in heavy boots, rolled up jeans, and were shaved "naked", these guys shouted out slogans in German. The defendants were not so dressed as "skinheads" and did not shout out slogans.

Testimony of witness Z., who testified that he knows B. and M., he heard about the organization of "skinheads", but he does not consider himself a "skinhead". A company of young people often gathered in the courtyard of house No. A in Berdsk, he was there about 5 times. Among them were B., D. and K., they were wearing dark high boots, camouflage pants and short black jackets. There were no nationalistic conversations with him. There were no nationalistic conversations in his presence. Subsequently, M. told him that B.A. (brother of defendant B) and his acquaintances are "skinheads" and they beat or are going to beat people of Caucasian nationality.

Testimony of witness K., who testified that he knew the defendants. He considers himself to be an informal person who listens to hard rock. They gathered in the courtyard of house No. A in the city of Berdsk, among them was B.A. Executioner, I. Stick, Jonik, and K. Bulldog. They all wore different clothes, their clothes were the same as ours. And. he does not refer to "skinhead", he, like him, is fond of rock music. They drank beer together, discussed rock concerts. He learned from his acquaintances that "skinheads" appeared in Berdsk. Since he is a patriot of the country, he was interested in this movement. He knows that "skinheads" use the fascist swastika. In the courtyard of the house where they gathered, a drawing of a fascist eagle and a swastika appeared, who made this drawing, he does not know. In the courtyard of the house where they gathered, no one carried on the propaganda of the "skinheads" movement, they did not conduct nationalist conversations. Where his acquaintances got books of nationalist content, he does not know, no one offered him such literature.

The testimony of witness O., at the preliminary investigation, which was read out at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, due to the impossibility of establishing his whereabouts, this circumstance was recognized by the court as extraordinary, preventing the appearance in court. The witness testified that he was fond of rock music, such as he is called informals, they usually gathered in the forest belt near the Giant enterprise. Every Sunday they go to Novosibirsk, where people who are fond of rock music gather on Lenin Square. Also in the city of Berdsk there are people who call themselves "skinheads", there are about 30 of them, they support the views - "Russia is only for Russians", "skinheads sometimes gathered together with informals. He knows that "skinheads" beat people of non-Russian nationality About a week ago, maybe a little later (interrogated on 28.10.05.), he was in a forest belt, near the Gigant enterprise, where "skinheads" also began to gather, he heard them say that they had beaten someone , but he doesn’t know where exactly, among these people was “Bulldog.” He also knows that the “skinheads” have special clothes: grinder boots or berets, camouflage trousers, puffy black jackets, they have black knitted hats on their heads. On October 23, 2005, he went to Novosibirsk with a group of informals, there were also "skinheads" with them, about 5 people, among them was "Bulldog" named A. and "Jonik". None of them said that in that day they beat someone up (case file 168-169 vol. 1).

Testimony of witness B., who testified that he knew K., but did not communicate with him. He does not consider K. a "skinhead", no one offered him literature of a nationalist persuasion, no one agitated to join any movement.

Interrogated at the preliminary investigation, his testimony was read out at the court session at the request of the prosecutor, in connection with the contradictions, B. testified that he had known K. for several years, his nickname was "Bulldog", that was how he was called. About a year ago, A. told him that he was a "skinhead" and that his movement was for the "white race". From his words, he knows that the elder in the city of Berdsk they have "The Executioner". He also heard the nickname "Jonic". K. told him that through the "Executioner" they had a connection with other regions, he also offered several times to join their movement, to take literature from them. A. told him that they went to Novosibirsk, "We started a showdown there." They all have the same clothes, boots - "grinders", red with iron inserts, he saw A. in the company of boys dressed the same way. 22.10.05. he, together with A., Sh., T. and a guy named A., was resting at the dacha, heard a conversation that they would go to Novosibirsk. 23.10.05. g., he did not see any weapons, chains, brass knuckles. When they returned to the city of Berdsk, A. and a guy named S. stayed to wait for the arrival of the Novosibirsk guys, and he left (case sheet 102-103 v. 2). At the hearing, B. retracted his testimony. The court presented the witness for review l. 103 v. 2. The witness explained that the signature in the protocol was worth it, but he signed the protocol without reading it. The phrase in the protocol of interrogation "The protocol was read personally, no comments were received on the protocol" he personally executed. The witness explained that the interrogator had incorrectly stated in the protocol of interrogation that he knew K.'s nickname and that he dressed in the manner indicated in the protocol. The details of the incident were given to him by the investigator. During the interrogation, he explained to the investigator that he knew K., but did not explain anything further to the investigator. During the interrogation, the security officer put psychological pressure on him, explained that he had to agree with everything, otherwise he could be put in the basement, told him to sign his testimony. With regard to K., he was asked to testify that the defendants were "skinheads", that they defend the white race, and that K. had given him this information. During the interrogation, the investigator did not exert any pressure on him.

In connection with the testimony of witness B. at the court session, at the request of the defense, he was interrogated as a witness Zh. He personally interrogated witness B., before the beginning of the interrogation, all witnesses were explained their rights, they were warned for knowingly giving false testimony. During the interrogation of witness B., his testimony was recorded almost verbatim, if necessary, he asked additional questions. After the interrogation, the witness independently read the record of the interrogation, which he himself indicated in the record of the interrogation. During the interrogation of the victims, interpreters were always present. Face-to-face confrontations in the case were not carried out, t.to. there was no need for it.

The court, analyzing the testimony of witness B., recognizes his testimony given during the preliminary investigation as reliable, since the witness's arguments that before the start of the interrogation he was subjected to psychological pressure by the detective, are untenable. As the witness explained at the court session, the investigator did not exert any pressure on him during the interrogation. In addition, as witness Zh. explained, B. independently testified in a free story, his testimony was recorded almost verbatim. After the interrogation, the witness independently read the record of the interrogation, which he himself indicated in the record of the interrogation. Based on the foregoing, the court concludes that witness B. changed his testimony in order to help the defendants evade criminal liability.

Testimony of witness Sh., who testified that he knew K., B., D. and B. He heard B. call A. by his nickname "Bulldog". He does not know what views K. has, they did not talk about it with him, he did not give him any literature. K. dressed, as well as all boots, necessarily "boots", he had a military uniform. 22.10.05. he, together with K., B. rested at the dacha. 23.10.05. When they returned to Berdsk, K. said that he needed to go on business.

The testimony of witness B., who testified that he knew I. and D., K. has known for about 5 years. They gathered together in a club, listened to rock music, they did not talk about "skinheads" among themselves. D. never expressed his attitude towards persons of non-Russian nationality, he does not know whether he distributed nationalist literature. From someone he heard about "skinheads" and became interested in this movement, for the sake of interest, he bought a book "Skins" in the store. Neither K. nor B. gave him nationalist literature. The drawing in the form of a spider and a swastika, which was confiscated from him, was drawn by U., other drawings were also not drawn by him. Together with K. and D., he twice traveled to Novosibirsk, where on the square named after. Lenin gathered guys who called themselves informals, they didn’t call themselves “skinheads”, they all drank beer, played the guitar. 23.10.05. K. called him on the phone, they agreed to meet at the station, where they were approached by I. and D. and informals from the city of Novosibirsk, there were about 20 of them. They were dressed in black jackets, jeans tucked into boots, and big boots. For what purpose they came to Berdsk, he did not know. I., K. and D. were wearing black jackets, jeans, and high boots. Everyone went to the stadium, where they began to drink beer. Then he and 7 other people went for a walk around the city. They did not have the goal of beating people of Caucasian nationality, he did not indicate to the guys the places where these people could be. K., D. and I. remained at the stadium, what they were talking about, he did not hear. Later he met K., D. and I. in an electric train, they were going to Novosibirsk.

The testimony of witness M., who testified that he knows D., B.A. and I., they gathered together in the courtyard of house No. A on the street. B city of Berdsk, along with other guys. B.A. (brother of defendant B.) he saw only a few times. He saw K. several times in the club, but in the group at B.A. he did not see him. Everyone who gathered in the courtyard of the house called themselves "skinheads". Their goal was to beat people of other nationalities. Once they were going to hold such an action, but they did not succeed. B.A. invited him to join their organization, for this he needed to participate in the beating of non-Russians. All of them were shod in high army boots with metal inserts. B.A. told him about how the “skinheads” dress, it was he who was a member of the “skinheads” organization, the rest were not members of the organization. He came to this conclusion, because. namely B.A. distributed special literature and agitated him to join organizations, talked about the rules adopted in the organization, it was B.A. he was beaten because he refused to participate in their organization. D., I., B.A., did not offer him to join the organization, they did not distribute literature, they did not distribute nationalist views. Sometimes they dressed like "skinheads", but mostly they wore clothes like everyone else.

In addition, the preliminary investigation authorities and the public prosecutor refer to the case materials as evidence of the guilt of the defendants B., D., I. and K. in this episode of the prosecution, without substantiating how this or that procedural document in the case confirms the guilt defendants.

Thus, the public prosecutor refers to the following written materials of the case:

- protocol of the search, during which the brochure "Jewish Happiness Russian Tears", 2 brochures "Combat Regulations ...", the newspaper "Native Siberia" (case sheet 225-226 v. 1) were found and confiscated in D.'s apartment . At the hearing, the defendant D., answering the questions of the court, explained that someone had given him this literature to read, possibly B..

- protocol of inspection of literature confiscated from D., during which it was established that the newspaper "Rodnaya Sibir" contains statements accusing Jews of striving for world domination, Jews are accused of all the troubles in Russia. Brochures "The Combat Regulations of the People's Militia in the Conditions of Total War" were published in the editorial office of "Native Siberia". The pamphlets contain the doctrine of the "people's militia", the definition of the "main enemy" named as international Zionism (case sheets 4-10 vol. 2);

- an inspection report, during which, at the end of house 69 of the microdistrict of Berdsk, an inscription was found and photographed in black and white dyes: "Locks of the mountain, Negroes of palm trees, Russia-Russians !!!". The letters "C" in the words "Russia" and "Russian" have been changed and look like a stylized Latin letter "s" (1 pp. 112-114 v. 1);

- a protocol of a search in I.'s apartment, during which 2 student notebooks with the inscriptions "Skinhead", Nazi drawings, a drawing of a cross were found and seized (case sheet 237-238 v. 1).

- a protocol of inspection of items seized during the search from I., during which it was established that in the student notebooks of the signed "Ilinykh Dima" there are drawings depicting the Nazi swastika, symbols of "anarchy", satanism, the inscription "Skinhead" in Latin letters (i.e. 2 ld 11-14 v. 2). At the hearing, the defendant Ilyinykh, answering the questions of the court, explained that the seized things belong to him, the drawings in the notebook were made by him when he was at school and when he studied history, he was interested in this period of history. In his notebook, he has the inscription "skinhead", he copied this inscription from a desk at school, because. he liked the font in which the inscription was made. He drew drawings just like that, he believes that this is not a fascist symbolism. The confiscated literature was given to him by someone to read, perhaps B.

- protocol of the search, during which K.'s apartment was found and confiscated: the brochure "Jewish Happiness Russian Tears", the brochure "Combat Regulations ...", the newspaper "Native Siberia", a piece of cloth with the image of a skull (case sheet 231- 232 v. 1). At the court session, K., answering the questions of the court, explained that the literature was not his, but B.. His girlfriend gave him a black cloth for his birthday, it does not symbolize or designate anything. He did not read literature. He did not keep the literature, it just lay at his place.

- protocol of inspection of literature confiscated from K.. during which it was established that the newspaper "Rodnaya Sibir" contains statements accusing the Jews of striving for world domination, the Jews are accused of all the troubles in Russia. Brochures "The Combat Regulations of the People's Militia in the Conditions of Total War" were published in the editorial office of "Native Siberia". The pamphlets contain the doctrine of the "people's militia", the definition of the "main enemy" named as international Zionism (case sheets 1-3 vol. 2);

Defendant B. at the hearing, answering the court's questions, explained that he really gave K. to read the confiscated literature, which he was given in Novosibirsk, t.to. he wanted to join the Patriots of Russia party, he even wrote a statement, this literature belongs to the party.

Analyzing the evidence presented above by the public prosecutor and the preliminary investigation in support of the guilt of the defendants B., D., I. and K., the court concludes that the evidence presented does not confirm the guilt of the defendants in episode a). The court came to this conclusion based on the following.

So the bodies of preliminary investigation on the episode of the accusation a) the defendants are accused of committing a crime under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, i.e. participation in an extremist community - "skinheads". The preliminary investigation bodies and the public prosecutor came to this conclusion based on the fact that:

• defendants B., K., I. and D. began to hold extremist views, to participate in gatherings of the extremist organization "Skinheads" in Novosibirsk;

• read and distribute literature calling for violence against persons of other races and nationalities;

• wear a uniform accepted in the community, use and publicly display fascist, nationalist and similar signs and symbols.

• this community has adopted its own rules and norms of behavior, uniforms and distinctive insignia between members of the community, depending on the time of participation in the activities of the community, for participation in criminal actions.

• committed a number of crimes motivated by racial and national hatred against the citizens of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, under the circumstances indicated above.

Under the extremist community, according to the Federal Law of 25.07.02. 114-FZ "On Counteracting Extremist Activities" means a public or religious association or other organization in respect of which a court, on the grounds provided for by this Law, has taken a final decision to liquidate or ban activities in connection with the implementation of extremist activities.

The signs of an extremist community for preparing or committing extremist activity are its organization, which includes a combination of such elements as the presence of a charter, a leader (leader) or a leading core; the cohesion of its participants around their leaders; the presence of a certain structure (for example, the center and regional divisions), symbols, as well as discipline based on their own norms of behavior, and a system of measures for its violation. Extremist organizations do not exist in isolation, but block among themselves, form coalitions, creating a community united around a single center based on a certain ideology. The issue of recognizing a registered public association as extremist is decided by the court in civil proceedings. Members of an extremist community are considered to be persons who have expressed support for the goals of this association or its specific actions, who take part in its activities, regardless of the registration of their participation, i.e. persons included in its composition and who have assumed the duties of a member of the organization, regardless of their participation in specific extremist actions.

However, the preliminary investigation authorities and the public prosecutor did not provide evidence of the participation of the defendants in the extremist community "skinheads".

Defendants D., B., K. and I. pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Defendant D., during the preliminary investigation, explained that, according to K., he knew about the "Slavic Union" party, he also gave him 3 brochures to read, among which was the "Combat Charter". He did not read this literature, did not attend party meetings, no one campaigned for him. He was not part of this movement. He did wear heavy boots, because it's fashionable. They periodically traveled to Novosibirsk, where young people gathered on Lenin Square to support his views.

Defendant K. testified during the preliminary investigation that he has acquaintances who call themselves skinheads, but he is not one of them, because not all of their views are shared. But he believes, just like skinheads, that Russians should live in Russia. He often met in the BEST club with skinheads, in the city of Berdsk there are 5 of them - D., I., and I., he does not know others. From time to time they communicate with informals in Novosibirsk on Lenin Square, where both skinheads and informals gather.

Defendant I. at the preliminary investigation testified that K. told him that he was against persons of non-Russian nationality, that K. did not tell him anything about meetings, actions, rallies. K. gave him brochures to read, including the Combat Regulations, but did not read this literature. He believes that persons of non-Russian nationality should not live in Russia, but he does not oppose foreign workers. He knows that in Novosibirsk on the square. Lenin often gathers rockers, fans of rock music, informals, where he went on weekends with K., D. and B..

Thus, the above-mentioned testimonies of the defendants do not constitute evidence of the defendants' guilt in committing the crime under episode a). Indeed, the fact that they adhered to nationalist views is recognized by the defendants, the defendant D. indicates that, according to K., he knows about the Slavic Union party. However, these facts do not testify that the defendants were members of the extremist community "Skinheads", since at the court session the prosecution did not present evidence confirming the existence of an active extremist community in the city of Novosibirsk "Skinheads". Thus, the preliminary investigation did not indicate what the structure of the extremist community "Skinheads" in Novosibirsk is, who is the head of the organization, what norms and rules of conduct are adopted there, and the dress code. It is not indicated when and where meetings of this organization were held, in which the defendants participated.

The testimonies of the witnesses cited by the preliminary investigation authorities and the public prosecutor also do not testify to the membership of the defendants in the extremist community "skinheads", and their conclusions that the defendants are skinheads are presumptive and not based on facts, which is why the testimonies of these witnesses cannot form the basis of a guilty verdict.

Thus, witnesses Z., Sh., B., Z., K., B., Sh., explained that they had not heard about this organization from the defendants, the defendants did not communicate with each other on this topic, they did not promote nationalist topics. The defendants really dressed like skinheads - in heavy boots and black leather jackets. it was fashionable. Witness Sh.'s conclusions that he refers only K. to skinheads are based on the fact that K. told him that he did not like people of non-Russian nationality. In addition, witness B. directly indicates at the court session that he saw real "skinheads" in Novosibirsk, and our guys, while referring to the defendants, bear little resemblance to skinheads. Similar evidence was given by witness B., explaining additionally that D. had never expressed his attitude towards persons of non-Russian nationality to him, he did not know whether they distributed nationalist literature. Neither K. nor B. gave him nationalist literature.

The testimony of witness O. is conjectural; he came to the conclusion that K. and D. are "skinheads", because the defendants dressed in heavy boots and short black jackets. This witness did not explain anything about the rest of the defendants, which also cannot serve as a basis for accusing the defendants of committing this crime.

Witness M., gives explanations about the events connected with B.A., who is not held criminally liable in this criminal case.

Witness B., his testimony at the preliminary investigation was recognized as reliable, indicated that from the words of K. he knows that he is a "skinhead" and that his movement is for the "white race". From his words, he knows that the elder in the city of Berdsk they have "The Executioner". He also heard the nickname "Jonic". K. told him that through the "Executioner" they had a connection with other regions, he also offered several times to join their movement, to take literature from them. A. told him that they went to Novosibirsk, "We started a showdown there." They all have the same clothes, boots - "grinders", red with iron inserts. However, witness B. reports the indicated information from the words of the defendant K., who does not admit guilt on this charge.

Literature confiscated from defendants K., D., and student I.'s notebooks with inscriptions testifies to their nationalist views, but does not prove their participation in the extremist community "Skinheads". The prosecution also did not provide evidence that the literature confiscated from the defendants was obtained by them in the extremist community "Skinheads". In addition, liability under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation begins at the age of 16. The indictment states that the defendants, including I., began to participate in the extremist organization "Skinheads" since 2004, and at that time I. was 15 years old, i.e. during the period indicated in the charge, he was not the subject of this crime.

Thus, analyzing the above-mentioned testimonies of witnesses, the court concludes that these testimonies do not testify to the guilt of the defendants in committing the crime under episode a), since it has not been established from the testimonies of witnesses that the defendants B., K., I. and D. began to hold extremist views, participate in meetings of an extremist organization in the city of Novosibirsk, read and distribute literature calling for violence against persons of other races and nationalities; wear a uniform accepted in the community, use and publicly display fascist, nationalist and similar signs and symbols. The preliminary investigation authorities did not indicate what kind of clothing is accepted in this community.

In addition, the preliminary investigation bodies do not indicate which particular rules of conduct are adopted in this community, as well as the insignia adopted in the community between members of the community, depending on the time of participation in the activities of the community, for participation in criminal acts. And these statements of the preliminary investigation bodies and the public prosecutor have not been confirmed in any way, evidence confirming this accusation has not been presented. Neither the preliminary investigation nor the state prosecutor presented evidence that there is an extremist community "Skinheads" in the city of Novosibirsk, of which the defendants are members, as the author of the indictment alleges. And according to the court, one cannot be a member of an extremist community, the existence of which has not been proven. At least neither the preliminary investigation nor the state prosecution has provided any admissible evidence that such a community exists.

Thus it is the court comes to the conclusion about the acquittal of the defendants on charges under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for lack of evidence of their guilt.

According to episode b), the defendant K. is also subject to acquittal. Defendant K. did not plead guilty to this charge, stating that he did not know about the age of I. and B. and did not involve them in the commission of the crime, evidence to the contrary was not presented to the court. The public prosecutor also dropped the charge in this part.

The claims of the prosecutor are subject to satisfaction in full, since the court concluded that the defendants were proven guilty of causing harm to the health of the victims Aymatov, Dzhomakhmadov and Ulmasov, in connection with which they were treated in the hospital.

When determining the type and measure of punishment, the court takes into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crimes committed, the personality of the perpetrators, who are characterized satisfactorily.

As mitigating circumstances, the court takes into account: the first conviction of B., K., I., D., partial admission of guilt and remorse for the deed, for the defendant I. his minor age, for the defendants: K., I. and D. appearances with confession.

No aggravating circumstances were found by the court.

The court, taking into account the circumstances of the crime committed, the identity of the perpetrators, mitigating circumstances, the severity of the deed, comes to the conclusion that the punishment was imposed: for defendants D., I. and K. in the form of imprisonment, for defendant B. without isolation from society.

Based on the aforesaid and guided by Article. 307, 308 and 309 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, court

SENTENCED:

B. found guilty of committing a crime under Art. Art. 214, 282 h.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and to impose a penalty: in Art. 214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the form of a fine in the amount of 20,000 rubles, under Art. 282 h. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the form of a fine in the amount of 150,000 rubles.

In accordance with Art. 69 h. 2 of the Criminal Code on the totality of crimes, by partial addition of the penalties imposed, to impose a penalty in the form of a fine in the amount of 160,000 RUB.

B. under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to justify.

Based on Art. 78 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to release B. from the imposed punishment, due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability.

Measure of restraint B. cancel.

D. found guilty of committing crimes under Art. Art. 116 h. 1, 111 h. 3 p. a, 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and impose a penalty: under Art. 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 3 months of corrective labor with deduction monthly to the state revenue of 10% of earnings for each crime, according to Art. 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 10 months in prison, under Art. 111 h. 3 p. a of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 6 years in prison.

Based on Art. 69 part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the totality of crimes, by partially adding up the sentences imposed, to finally impose a sentence of 6 years and 6 months in prison before serving, with serving the sentence in a strict regime correctional colony. The term of punishment shall be calculated from December 28, 2006. Set off in the term of serving the sentence detention from 03 to 08 November 2005.

D. according to Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to justify.

preventive measure D. before the entry into force of the sentence to change to detention in SIZO-3 r.p. Linevo Iskitimsky district of the Novosibirsk region, D. taken into custody in the courtroom.

I. found guilty of committing crimes under Art. Art. 116 h. 1, 111 h. 3 p. a, 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and impose a punishment; under Art. 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 2 months of corrective labor with deduction monthly to the state revenue of 10% of earnings for each crime, according to Art. 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 8 months in prison, under Art. 111 h. 3 p. a of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 5 years in prison.

Based on Art. 69 part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the totality of crimes, by partial addition of the sentences imposed, to finally impose a sentence of 5 years and 6 months in prison before serving in an educational colony. The term of punishment shall be calculated from December 28, 2006. Set off in the term of serving the sentence detention from 03 to 05 November 2005.

I. under Art. 282-1 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to justify.

preventive measure I. before the entry into force of the sentence to change to detention in a pre-trial detention center - 3 p.p. Linevo Iskitimsky district of the Novosibirsk region, I. taken into custody in the courtroom.

K. found guilty of committing crimes under Art. Art. 116 h. 1, 111 h. 3 p. a, 115 h. 2, 111 h. 2 p. e of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and impose a penalty: under Art. 116 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 10 months of corrective labor with deduction of 10% of earnings monthly to the state income, according to Art. 115 h. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 10 months in prison, under Art. 111 h. 3 p. a of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 6 years in prison, under Art. 111 h. 2 p. e of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 5 years in prison.

Based on Art. 69 part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the totality of crimes by partial addition of the sentences imposed, to finally impose a sentence of 8 years in prison before serving, with serving the sentence in a correctional colony of strict regime. The term of punishment shall be calculated from 03 November 2005.

K. according to Art. 282-1 part 2, 150 part 1, 150 part 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to justify.

The measure of restraint K. until the entry into force of the sentence remains the same - detention in SIZO-3 r.p. Linevo, Iskitimsky district, Novosibirsk region.

Collect in favor of the Berdsk Municipal Central City Hospital: from K. 674 rubles. 06 kop., in solidarity with K., D., I. 2902 rubles. 77 kopecks, in the absence of funds from I. recover from I.M..O. and I.V.I. for 1451 rubles. 38 kop. from each; in solidarity with K., D., I. 5593 rubles. 71 kopecks, in the absence of funds from I. recover from I.M.Oh. and I.V.I. for 2796 rubles. 85 kop. from everyone.

Material evidence: seized literature - to be left in the case, the rest of the material evidence to be destroyed.

The verdict can be appealed in cassation to the Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Novosibirsk Regional Court within 10 days from the date of announcement, and by the convict in custody - within the same period from the date of delivery of a copy of the verdict to him. If a cassation appeal is filed, the convict has the right to petition for his participation in the consideration of the criminal case by the cassation court.

Judge (signature) V.A. Verkhovsky

The verdict was appealed, in relation to K. and D. it was amended as follows: "D.. consider convicted under Article 116 Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 120 hours of compulsory work, under Article 115 Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 10 months in prison, under article 111 part 3 point "a" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 6 years in prison. On the basis of article 69 part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for cumulative crimes, by partial addition of the sentences imposed, to finally appoint 6 years and 6 months of imprisonment in to 120 hours of compulsory labor under Article 116 Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to 10 months in prison under Article 115 Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, under Article 111 Part 3 paragraph " a" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 6 years in prison, according to article 111 part 2 p. "e" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 5 years in prison. On the basis of article 69 part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the totality of crimes by partial addition of the imposed punishments, finally to be sentenced to 8 years' imprisonment in a penal colony of strict regime.In the rest of this sentence in relation to K., D., as well as in full in relation to B. and I., was left unchanged. Cassation complaints of lawyers L. G. Vdovina, A. G. Moiseevskikh, Yu. .IN. - partially satisfy", entered into force on May 07, 2007.

Copy is correct: Judge -

Secretary -

GAS "Justice"