A polite refusal

The New Times had at his disposal the documents on the murder of Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova: interrogation protocols, wiretaps, personnel made by cameras of video surveillance on the Prechistenka, as well as a notarized refusal to testify one of the main witnesses of the parties to the state image, Ilya Goryachev: he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that he claims that Tikhonov specified under the pressure of the FSB officers.

Do not listen to the faint of heart

** One of the evidence, according to the investigation, the guilt of Tikhonov and Hasis is the “wiretapping” of their rented apartment, launched by the FSB on October 23, 2009, and completed on the day of the detention of the suspects, November 3. Ten days of conversations between the “killers”, from which we will learn not only that Hasis “does not have breakfast” in the morning, but also that the Russian “Bonnie and Clyde” regarding the conspiracy will give the head starting heading. “I looked around around the house, everything seems to be fine,” says a female voice. “Zay, I will put the barrel there,” is already male. “In short, if we go to the breakthrough, then we take the red bag, which is here, and fall through the window.” Next - a kaleidoscope of nicknames and nicknames: Ed, Czech (about which Tikhonov says “our fascist”), Schulz, opera, guru, bearded. There is no doubt: this is exactly what the press is called "fascist underground." At the same time, there are literally two words about Markelov in conversations. Hasis: “You explain from the opposite how they could go out on the opera in the Markelov case?” No confessions. According to the defense, the theme of Markelov’s murder in kitchen conversations surfaced because the brother of the deceased lawyer-Mikhail Markelov-gave an interview with the Internet Gazeta, in which he said who knew who killed Stasa. According to The New Times, the interview was authorized by the investigation and was part of the operational game - in fact, fishing for live bait. “These people (killers are the New Times) are closely connected with a number of informal organizations,” Mikhail Markelov said then. - My conclusions coincide with the conclusions of investigators. Now I can definitely say that these people are unlikely to be able to evade responsibility. They will no longer be able to leave Russia. And the murder has nothing to do with the Caucasus. ” Tikhonov and Hasis, having read the interview, are building assumptions about what it can mean. According to their defense, Nikita understands that the case can be dumped on him, since he had been in an illegal situation for a long time and was hiding as a suspect of the murder of Anti -Fascist Ryukhin (now all charges on this case have been removed from him). In fact, wiretapping in the next proves that it is not necessary to prove: Tikhonov and Hasis are active participants in the nationalist underground. But their involvement in the murder is not clear: in 10 days wiretapping, which the accused did not know about, they managed not to get sick of once, even despite the fact that they were provoked by the confessions of Markelov Sr.. But from their conversations we can conclude that Tikhonov is not a simpleton. He changes passwords and appearances, leaves the FSB officers, like from boys. What indirect evidence of his guilt in the murder of Markelov actually turns into an argument of defense: can it be imagined that such a deeply bocked -up agent commits a crime among broadcasting in the center of Moscow, and after that he carries a gun of murder home, where he stores him for 11 months until the detention and search?

Open the face

Look at this face. According to the investigation, this is Evgenia Hasis near House 20 on Prechistenka Street, waiting for the exit from the press center of Markelov and Baburova in order to give a signal to Tikhonov, who is already staggering around the neighborhood with a gun. This is the most “clear” frame that is in business. From the video, on which the supposedly Tikhonov appears, it is still worse: there is no killer on the pure of killer, and in the subway his face will never fall into lenses - he skillfully covers him with a scarf or a white scarf. One can say one thing from the cameras from the Prechistenka: the girl is there for a reason. It is completely wrapped up, despite the fact that the street is not so cold (some passers -by who got into the frame, without hats and in unbuttoned jackets). She clearly wants to go unnoticed. At the same time, it costs more than forty minutes, but it is difficult to assume that she waits in such a strange place and in a strange time, for example, a young man. There is only one conclusion: the killer really had a accomplice. But is Hasis? The three former colleagues of her former colleagues are identified by the interrogation protocol of the New Times: this is a certain Tabachenkova, Executive Director of Falcom City LLC, Dyakonov, Deputy General Director of ATLETICA-AlANANCE LLC, and another deputy industry of ATletics Glova (Hasis herself worked there by the head of the online store). All of them confirm that the defendant was a nationalist, characterize her as an “explosive and aggressive” girl, who also had “big problems with shortcomings and financial reporting” at work. Glova says that "Hasis never hid her views, in conversations mentioned that" Russia - for Russians ", on the Internet read articles on this topic, we argued with her to scream and hoarse." And all three colleagues, who are “unmistakable”, who are with “complete confidence”, recognize Eugene on footage from street cameras, on which, even after the prosecutors “nothing is visible”. They are recognized not even by clothes, but "by the manner of moving", "the movement of the arms and legs." The question arises: is this possible taking into account the fact that people on the frames move in jerks and are more like robots? Hasis herself about their colleagues says: “The company's management several times tried to attract sports drugs prohibited in Russia for smuggling in Russia. However, criminal cases were closed at the request of patrons from the FSB. In the company itself, everyone knew it. "

As for the killer directly, he, having committed a crime, descends to the Kropotkinskaya subway, reaches the Lenin Library, moves to Borovitskaya and sits on the train towards the Polyanka metro. All this time he periodically falls into the field of view of cameras, but his face is not visible. But then the trace of the killer is lost. When Tikhonov gave a confession (according to his version - under pressure), he said that he drove to Kakhovskaya station, went out into the street, sat on a bus or minibus and reached the street of Marshal Zakharov, where he rented an apartment at that time. It is amazing that in the case there is not a single video from the cameras confirming this route. Suddenly the killer opened his face somewhere? This would greatly help the investigation. But even without this, there is a frame in the case, where the alleged criminal stands against the background of a column at one of the stations. Unlike other personnel, where it is captured in dynamics, here it is statistical. Based on the size of the column, it would be possible to conduct an examination and establish exactly whether the growth and physique of the criminal with Tikhonovsky coincides? Such evidence would be much stronger than the testimony of witnesses, who saw the killer’s face under a scarf for a second, and a year later confidently identified him.

I look far away

About eyewitnesses of murder is a special conversation. There are not many of them for the crime committed by the day in the center of Moscow, but those that are, are doubtful: many of them are former or current law enforcement officers. We read on the protocols of interrogations: Alexei Chereshnev, without higher education, but at the same time, the traffic police inspector 1 of the department on the special vehicle of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate in Moscow, the junior Leitinant of the police, has been working in the organs from the age of 22. Two weeks after the murder, he, giving testimony, remembers that on the Prechistenka “looked at the clock and the time was 14:24”.

Dmitry Orlov, temporarily not working, idle, without children, but having a driver’s certificate of California D 306 7853. He finds the most important evidence - a bullet (according to the investigation - released in Markelov), but finds it a day after the murder, right at the crime scene, coming to lay flowers in memory of Markelov. It follows from the protocol dated January 19, 2009 that during the inspection of the scene, carried out from 16 hours 03 minutes to 19 hours 15 minutes, not a single sleeve and not a single bullet were found. On January 20, 2009, from 12 hours 30 minutes to 13 hours 15 minutes, an additional inspection of the scene was performed using the metal detector. At the same time, night cleaning of snow is carried out on the Prechistenka every day (vol. 1, p. 193 - 214). Neither specialists nor snowplow, they found a bullet - was lucky alone Orlov.

Alexander Popov, 27 years old, but has already worked in the bodies, and now - an employee of the economic security department GE Money Bank. Almost a year after the murder, December 14, 2009, he writes a statement addressed to the head of the IC Bastrykin, in which he "wants to testify in the case." “I began to look around and caught a girl who moved a quick step into the Kropotkinskaya metro line,” says the witness. “She attracted my attention with her behavior, which I, as a reserved police officer, caused a clear suspicion.” What kind of behavior - Popov does not decipher. So later, he explains the desire to testify by the fact that "he saw the suspected Hasis in the news, and recognized her."

Two more direct witnesses, Murashkin and Ermakov, working in the Swiss company Zulzer, whose office is located on the Prechistenka, give completely different testimonies than other witnesses and Tikhonov himself, when he was admitted to the murder. Both claim that running away to the metro, the killer “holds a gun in his hand, waving them” - they say, disperse. Nikita himself during the interrogation “immediately puts a pistol in your pocket” and the only one who confirms them is witness Chereshnev. Another oddity: Witness Murashkin, giving testimony on January 21, 2009, that is, by fresh memory, speaks of Tikhonov as a man of "thin physique, since I noticed that clothes on him were free." The fact that he describes the weapon in the hands of the killer as a Makarov pistol, and not Brownnig is still nonsense. But to call Tikhonov a thin language does not turn. The version that he gained weight later does not withstand criticism: on the Internet there is a video of Tikhonov on a picnic in the forest long before his arrest, on which he is the same “bors” as now. Murashkin repeats his testimony during interrogation on January 27.

A driven court

For comments, The New Times turned to lawyer Roman Karpinsky, representing the interests of the widow of Stanislav Markelov and his brother Mikhail in court. The lawyer said that he had no right to comment on evidence that have not yet been presented in court, but emphasized: “I value my reputation and would not go into the case if I was not convinced that the arrested were involved in the crime. I often act as a defender of the accused of politically motivated cases, with all kinds of falsifications, with confessions obtained as a result of threats. Accordingly, in this case, I initially felt doubts: is it the same? But, having studied the case, he came to the conclusion that this is not the case. It also seemed strange to me that Tikhonov did not get rid of the murder tool. But it is necessary to judge by the totality of all evidence, and not pulling them out one at a time. In court, Tikhonov admitted that Browning, which was the instrument of murder, was really removed from him during the search, but put forward the version that the gun was transferred to him to his acquaintance for repairs. Now in the trial only part of the evidence has been investigated. There will also be directly proving the guilt of the defendants. I am convinced that when all the evidence of the prosecution is submitted in court, the “mosaic” will be finalized. ” The lawyer of the defendants, Alexander Vasiliev,, in turn, Tikhonov’s innocence says the following: “Only the omnipotent Lord God can be sure of, I am confident ninety -five percent. In the murder case, I consider the most likely version of the Chechen Trace and Markelov’s participation in the case of beating the inhabitants of Blagoveshchensk. In both cases, the interests of those who had the opportunity, and most importantly, the skill of committing such crimes were affected. ” In the current court, Vasiliev is extremely tough: “If the Russian judicial system was a horse, it should be shot” **

Refusal - to believe?

** The New Times has already written that one of the main defendants in the case is Ilya Goryachev, the leader of the nationalist movement "Russian Image". His unexpected testimony against his friend Tikhonov is the main intrigue in the process. During interrogations, Goryachev says that Tikhonov and Hasis personally admitted to him in a crime, describing his details. The head of the Russian Verdict organization Alexei Baranovsky believes that "this is generally the only direct evidence of the fault of the defendants in the case." After draining the interrogations to the network a month before the beginning of the hearing in the Moscow City Court, Goryachev left Russia to one of the countries of Eastern Europe, where many people are still in - fearing the revenge of nationalists for betrayal. The prosecution, according to our information, was sure before last Wednesday that Goryachev would soon come to court and confirm his testimony personally. The New Times contacted Ilya, he gave an interview, and then sent a written refusal of all his testimonies to editorial mail. Goryachev emphasized: “He wrote a refusal for a long time, back in August 2010. Then no one, except for the FSB, was known about my testimonies against Tikhonov, so there can be no question of any pressure on me by nationalists. Only the FSB pressed me. Why didn't you write right away? In those conditions, I could not do this. ” When asked why he talks about this only now, Ilya says: “In the history of criminal cases, it often happens that a person admits something, then refuses, then he admits again. Given the high level of qualifications of the FSB officers in the field of pressure on people, I did not want to talk about anything until I leave the country, they would not take the jury, and the court will not begin. At the same time, I emphasize that my refusal was written in the presence of my lawyer and certified by a notary. This is not some kind of Diplot. ”

According to Goryachev, on November 5, 2009, two days after Tikhonov’s arrest, the capture group burst into his apartment. “I was taken to Petrovka, there the FSB officer spoke to me, who knew my whole life over the past two years in the smallest details. Two more interrogations took place five days later and in April. All this time I was conducted surveillance, all my conversations were listened to. On April 20, I was taken right in a cafe on pure ponds in the presence of a huge number of witnesses. They took it to the Investigative Committee, interrogated all night. This was not in the morning, as indicated in the protocol and can be seen in the video - before the interrogation, the investigator Krasnov translated the clock. Interrogation was preceded by 8 hours of conversations about all aspects of my life, especially since during a search in November a personal computer was removed from my house, there were plenty of different information there. ” What kind of information, Goryachev did not specify, saying only: "There was no hellish compromising evidence there, but you can choose a key for each person." The preliminary conversation, according to Ilya, was carried out by the investigator Krasnov, but two FSB officers. “I clearly outlined two possible prospects: to testify and leave the office, or go to Lefortovo, where someone would give them to me. Initially, in the case of Markelov, I went as an accused. I also offered the “option” of Maxim Bazilev, who “committed himself” on Petrovka in a pre -trial detention center. After the testimony that I gave, I was asked to sign the paper that I would not come to the court, because I am afraid that Nikita Tikhonov threatened me on the phone, and I confirm all my words remotely. They did it, realizing that I could refuse Tikhonov’s reservation. I declare: everything that I said and signed is not true. Nikita never threatened me, he never said that he had killed Makrelov, we did not even discuss the name of the lawyer, although we really met regularly. Hasis threats are also complete nonsense. I learned her last name from the news after her detention. I want to emphasize that I gave the testimony not because I was scared by a prison. I understood what consequences my arrest would cause for my organization, how many unreasonable arrests would be. The FSB planned to create a large -scale nationalist conspiracy and shove on us not only the murder of Markelov, but also many other crimes. " With the Tikhnov himself, Goryachev was the last time he talked on the phone in early October 2010, when he was sitting in Sailor's Silence. “I told him that I was forced to testify the FSB that there was nothing good in them. He replied: "I do not hold evil at you."

Goryachev's revelations evaluate for yourself. The New Times got the impression that he is very nervous, and knows much more than he says. At the same time, Goryachev’s sincerity is doubtful even among some nationalists. Many believe that Ilya made Fint with his ears: at the same time he “bleached” himself before the right movement, and at the same time did nothing for the real “salvation” of Tikhonov, since his written refusal of legal force in court has. To the question “Could the witness inform the court that they had previously been given false testimonies by sending a notarized statement?” The lawyer Tikhonova Vasiliev replied: “He cannot, since this method of communication between the court and witness is not provided for by law. Moreover, no notary can assure the authenticity of the content of the application. He can only certify the authenticity of the signature. ” But The New Times said that he was considering the possibility of coming to the court. “Yes, I'm really not going to return to Russia, which means to attend hearings. I have doubts about the relative that I will be allowed to get to court. But if the defense can not do without this, I will most likely ask that as many lawyers and journalists could accompany me from the airport to court and back and come. ”

So, in the Tikhonov-Hasis case-more and more questions. The main one is how and when browning came to them. The answer to him can either really prove their guilt, or bring Markelov to the true killers. **

- Document -

* Increase the signature