Ivanovo journalist sits in a colony for 10 years for the murder of a girl, although the killer performed on TV with self -disclosure

In the Ivanovo region, relatives and colleagues of journalist Andrei Sidnev seek a revision of his criminal case. Previously, he was convicted of 18 years in prison for the murder of a girl. Moreover, the young man stipulated the true killers. Now one of the criminals performed on the air of Channel One with sensational recognition. However, the prosecutor's office is in no hurry to review the shameful and, in fact, fabricated criminal case.

On Thursday, the “Sidnev case” moved from the dead point - the Ivanovo Regional Court canceled the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court in connection with the inconsistency of his conclusions by the actual circumstances of the case, reports Newsland . In other words, the Russian femid granted the complaint of Andrei Sidnev about the reluctance of the prosecutor's office to resume the proceedings.

As follows from the case file, Andrei Sidnev was condemned by almost 20 years of a penal colony for the robbery and murder of a girl. This happened in 2001, when the young man studied at the Department of Journalism of Ivanovo State University.

According to the classmate of the convict, Andrei was a bright and outstanding student who had already made a career in the journalistic field, but did not shy away and any other work because of the need: in his free time he worked as a time in local publications, and also worked as a seller in a stall and in a car service. In July of the same 2001, Andrei was arrested after two people were testified against him.

Witnesses in the criminal case showed that on June 21, 2001, Andrei Sidnev committed the cruel and cold -blooded murder of the girl right before their eyes.

Sidnnev was stipulated by Vadim Ryabov and Boris Rusakov, who consisted of robbers and killers in a gang, writes Jourdow . Moreover, false witnesses knew the victim of their reservation quite well. According to the colleague of the convicted journalist Anna Muravyeva, the car service in which Andrei was earned, belonged to the brother of Vadim Ryabov.

According to colleagues Sidnev, who saw the materials of criminal cases, instituted at one time on Ryabov and Rusakov, both are inveterate criminals. Back in the 1980s, they committed crimes and were not in the wretches with the law. It was they, according to the alternative version, that made reprisals against the girl on June 21.

Presumably, Ryabov and Rusakov met a future victim on an ad in a newspaper. At the meeting, the attackers robbed the victim, taking away jewelry, after which Vadim strangled it with a booze, getting rid of an unwanted witness.

The criminals buried the corpse of the girl in the forest under Shuya.

The official version records the same details of the crime, but Andrei Sidnev appears as a killer. It is amazing how easily the criminals managed to confuse the investigators and direct them along the false trail.

When Ryabov and Rusakov realized that the circle of suspects was contracting, they decided to “substitute” some outsider in order to avoid punishment. At first they wanted to stipulate their young accomplice named Ignatiev. But later, Andrei Sidnev was recognized as a more suitable candidate for the role of a “dummy killer”.

At first, Ryabov and Rusakov even planned to kill the journalist, so that it was easier to imitate his escape and concealment from the police. But in the end, Ryabov nevertheless abandoned this plan, because he did not want to "stir his hands."

As evidence in the “Sidnev case”, telephone printouts of negotiations and the testimony of Ryabov, Rusakov, as well as the witness of Matveev, who had never seen the accused, appeared as evidence.

Comparing the facts, the defense of the journalist found out that Matveev could not testify at all on January 11, 2002 in the Leninsky District Department of Internal Affairs of Ivanovo, as stated in the case file. At that moment, Matveev was in jail, and he did not leave the camera and did not meet with the investigator. Similar conclusions can be drawn on the basis of Matveev’s personal file materials.

Telephone printouts that appeared in the Sidnev case were not properly authorized. Yuri Kozharsky, who headed the Ivtelecom OJSC security department in 2001 (now the head of the Ivanovo branch of Home Credit Bank) in conversations with journalists claimed that such information could not provide anyone, and if he had provided, only on the basis of a court decision and with the preparation of an official cover letter.

True, such a letter is attached to the case. But it does not have a date, outgoing number, print, and Kozharsky signatures. In the printouts themselves there is no telephone conversation that the defendant referred to. This call could confirm Alibi by a journalist who insists that Ivanovo did not leave that day. Finally, there were two witnesses who confirmed Alibi Andrei and said that he worked in the stall that day. The same is evidenced by the accounting documents provided by the employer of the novice journalist. However, the court simply closed his eyes for all these inconsistencies.

As a result, Andrei Sidnev was sentenced to a 18-year sentence, which became a shock for his family and friends. Moreover, he was sent to serve his sentence to a maximum security colony.

And nine years later the incredible happened - in 2009, the accomplice of the murder of Rusakov confessed that Sidnev was not involved in the crime. He even tried to apologize in absentia to the convict. All this happened on the air of the first channel of television.

“They don’t forgive this for this. We broke his life,” Vadim Rusakov said in the recording of the program. Now this video can be found on the Internet.

The recognition recorded on the air, Rusakov asked to transfer Andrei’s mother to use this as the basis for revising the case. However, Anna Sidneva said that the prosecutor's office refused to consider the video as an argument in defense of her son Andrei.

Now the woman is forced to turn to the very top in order to achieve a fair and thorough investigation. “I wrote to the president and prime minister. There is no answer yet,” Anna added. “My son served ten years for a crime that I had not committed.”

We add that after the recognition of Rusakov, other "evidence" began to collapse in the Sidnev case. However, the prosecutor's office is clearly persistent, without even trying to interrogate the witness. It seems that investigators are afraid that upon new consideration, the case can “crumble”, and then you will have to be responsible for unprofessional work.

Andrei Sidnenev himself insists on his innocence and asks to revise his case and correct the judicial mistake at the cost of 18 years of life.