Open court with closed persons

The process began over Tikhonov and Hasis

Open court with closed persons. In the Moscow City Court, hearing began on one of the most high -profile criminal cases of recent years. In the dock, the alleged killers of lawyer Stanislav Markelova and journalist Anastasia Baburova are the alleged killers. The New Times watched the first meetings

The process started unexpectedly briskly: in the first week - three six -hour meetings, taking into account the fact that on February 23 the court did not work. According to the results of the first hearings, the prosecution managed to show the obvious: the defendants Nikita Tikhonov (the alleged killer who pleads only under the article “Weapons Trade”) and his cohabitant Evgeny Hasis (the alleged accomplice, completely denied her guilt), really adhered to radical nationalist views, communicated tightly with the national subgrade, are dangerous for society and, according to the Hamburg account, should be from the Hamburg account. it is isolated. But the main question - whether they really killed Markelov and Baburov on January 19, 2009 - remains open. If you do not take into account the constant bothering of the parties to the defense with the judge, the rather senseless digging in the little things (it got to the point that for an hour the lawyers Hasis and the FSB officer could not agree, shaking the defendant during the detention or not) and the attempts of the suspects to manipulate the jury (for example - the unexpected issue of the Hasis of the same FSB officer: “What did you feel when you felt when boasting A butt on the head? ”), In three days, the prosecution managed to bring only a small part of the evidence of the guilt of Tikhonov and Hasis. True, it is known about the rest without it. But for the one and the other - there are a lot of questions.

Proof No. 1: Pistol

Browning, from which, according to investigators, a lawyer and a journalist were killed, found in a rented apartment at Tikhonov on Svoboda Street during a search on November 3, 2009, where he himself, along with Hasis, was detained. A whole arsenal was found in the apartment in different places: grenades, pistols, explosive devices and a Kalashnikov assault rifle. At the trial on Monday, Tikhonov admitted that he “only” traded in this weapon, and Browning came to him shortly before the detention - supposedly “a friend gave it for repairs”. If Tikhonov, suppose, told the truth, then, in theory, he could name the names of those who slipped his gun, and demand the investigation. But he said nothing. Rather, the question from the prosecution rightly arose: "From whom exactly the weapon came to you and to whom did you sell it?" - The suspect replied: “I will not say. These people did not make me anything bad. " Tikhonov is generally classic, as his associates say, a “prisoner of conscience”. His father Alexander Tikhonov, who was present at the trial, to the question of The New Times: "Why will the son not tell you, where did he get the instrument of murder from?" - He said: "He already explained this in his appeal: it is better to perish than betray!" But what kind of betrayal can we talk about if you yourself have been framed? Why, for the sake of these people, pull the strap and land in jail, probably for a lifetime? Or is there any other motivation that Tikhonov is silent about? In any case, he is silent. Therefore, browning remains the most serious evidence of his guilt.

No. 2: Tikhonov’s recognition

With the rest of the evidence, the situation is worse. The second trump card of the prosecution is the confessions of Nikita Tikhonov himself, given to them both during the detention and after. The defense tactics are not new here: Tikhonov eventually abandoned the testimony, they allegedly crushed him-they beat him and threatened to send his beloved Hasis to a press hut. It is quite possible to allow this: how the FSB works with people, it is well known - and the “desired” gun can be thrown away, and knock out the testimony. The third day of the hearing was just dedicated to a survey of two FSB officers by the names of Dovlatov and Zhmerov, who conducted the detention of Tikhonov and Hasis and a search in the apartment. They were slightly confused in two testimonies: what Hasis (in a blouse or sweater) was dressed and where she was at the time of detention (in the room or stood behind Tikhonov, who opened the front door for him). At the same time, other, much less significant details of the Feesbashniki remembered thoroughly. In addition, a completely fair question for witnesses was raised from the defense: why did a search for so long and what have been done with the detainees all this time? According to the protocol, the process took eleven hours, from half past seven in the morning until half past seven in the evening, despite the fact that the apartment is not royal mansions: a small -sized kopecks with a corridor, kitchen, bathroom, toilet and one living room - the second was originally closed by the owner to the key. Jemerov replied to this question: "If you tried to describe such an arsenal!" However, the former senior investigator for particularly important cases of the Investigative Committee at the Ministry of Internal Affairs Pavel Zaitsev, to whom The New Times turned to advice, considers it “very strange”: “I can’t imagine what can be done in a small apartment for 11 hours. For my practice, this has never happened. During this time, you can search and rewrite a multi -storey office, and every piece of paper. Unless, of course, the investigators did not wait for the expert for half a day or did not look for witnesses. ” They did not expect and did not seek: the forensic expert was part of the group included in the apartment, and they found the witnesses an hour after the arrest. But the topic of time to search for development in court did not receive, no matter how the side of defense tried. In general, I must say that Judge Alexander Zamashnyuk behaves in relation to Tikhonov’s lawyers and Hasis rather harshly: for example, it does not allow them to ask clarifying questions, thanks to which the defense tries to catch witnesses on inconsistencies. “The repeated question is not allowed. The answer has already been received, ”Zamashnyuk said every time, even when the answers were simply impossible to hear. The fact is that four out of five witnesses brought by the charge last week (including the murder mentioned above and the immediate witness of the murder) gave evidence from a separate room and changed voices. In fact, no one saw them or heard them. “Our trial is turning into the interrogation of the glutters! - the lawyer Hasis Gennady Nebrisov was indignant. - So one person can testify with different voices! I object to this order of interrogation! "

"

Can a person who does not have special skills see his face under a sliding scarf for a second, but at the same time remember him so much so that a year later it is unconditionally identified?

"

To clarify all doubts about the detention and the search could video recording (but for some reason she was not conducted by investigators), as well as wiretapping. The latter just exists in full: the “bugs” stood in Tikhonov’s apartment a few weeks before the detention. The lawyers of the defense with whom the New Times correspondent was in one of the breaks in the smoking room literally vying that they repeatedly submitted a motion to introduce her to the materials: “But each time they refuse us. Allegedly, this wiretapping is "household" and is not related to the essence of the matter. That is, the wiretaps of Tikhonov’s kitchen conversations with Hasis, which will be presented in court, are not of everyday character, but the most important document proving the illegality of the actions of the FSB officers is worn! If she surfaced, you (journalists) would have a lot of work. ” Indeed, why shouldn't the judge Zamashnyuk allow to introduce this damn wiretap to the case? Exclusively in the name of establishing truth.

No. 3: Witness of the murder

A direct witness of a bloody drama on the Prechistenka named Murashkin was summoned to court on Tuesday. He also testified from the secret room and Bas. “I saw a man twice: on the afternoon of January 19, 2009 and last year at identification,” he said, looking at Tikhonov, apparently through the screen. “At about 14.00 or 14.30 on January 19, I walked along the street of Prechistenka towards the metro with my friend. When we went through house No. 1, we heard loud pops from behind, as if torn a car tire, and turned around. This man fled towards us in a hat with a wrapped scarf face. When he ran past, the scarf crawled down, and I saw his face. The runner made the movement with a gun, they say, disperse, and moved towards the subway. We looked back and saw that two people lay in the area of ​​the White Chambers, a meadow of blood spread under them ... ”

It seems that everything is clear, but here the question arises: can a person who has no special skills can see his face under a sliding scarf for a second, but at the same time remember him so much so that a year later it is unconditionally identified? Theoretically - yes. But even the mother of Nastya Baburova Larisa Ivanovna mentioned in court: “Tikhonov has nothing special in appearance. An ordinary person with ordinary features. "

No. 4: Goryachev

The appearance of this witness is expected in court as no other. Ilya Goryachev, the leader of the Russian Image movement, one of the most authoritative among the right -wing radicals, on November 9, 2009, in fact, passed his associates Tikhonov and Hasis with giblets. It is his testimony that is one of the main evidence of their guilt. Goryachev interrogations were “leaked” to the network a month before the start of the trial for one of the file sharing, they immediately became a hit of the Internet. It is clear that the “drain” was organized by the consequence, the only question is for: in advance to convince the public of the guilt of Tikhonov and Hasis, or, as many nationalists believe, make a split into the right movement and thereby prevent new performances by a la Manezhka? During interrogations, Goryachev says that Nikita and Eugene “personally admitted to him in the murder of Markelov,” clearly describing the details of the crime. But there are many white spots in this story. Among nationalists, the fact that Goryachev passed Tikhonov was the same sensation as if, for example, Surkov passed Putin or Luzhkov - Baturin. Obviously, just like that, at the call of conscience, such evidence does not give. Goryachev is an abmitial person who dreamed of entering a big policy and recently removed his organization from the radical field, but now he is a corpse, potentially not only political (according to The New Times, due to the threat of reprisal, Ilya is hidden abroad). It is clear that they were driven by something more than telling the truth. He himself at interrogation explained the revelations by the fact that he feared for his life, since “Hasis directly threatened him” for the abandonment of radical ways of struggle. But everyone who knows what a “Russian image” is, such an explanation is seen ridiculous: this is a serious combat organization that can protect their leader. Now she was on the verge of collapse, the rest of the right armed against her. The new leader of the “Russian image” Alexei Mikhailov, the closest ally of Goryachev, came on the third day of the hearing to the Moscow City Court to explain with his father Tikhonov and through him - with Nikita himself, and The New Times said the following: “They pressed it to Ilya, so he gave such evidence. They set a condition for him: either to show on Tikhonov, or the circle of suspects in the Markelov murder case expanded, many nationalists would be declared a terrorist group and planted. ”

When asked whether Goryachev refuses to testify in court, Mikhailov answered extensively: “We are all waiting for this, but I can’t say for sure.” It’s not long to wait-it seems that the court will work in non-stop and the next week.