The case of the "pedophile" Makarov

Before our eyes, they destroy a good friendly family. But we can't help

Tomorrow, November 29, another turn is expected in the multi -month mockery of the Russian investigative and judicial systems over the Makarov family. The Moscow City Court will consider the cassation complaint about the sentence to Vladimir Makarov, found guilty of violent acts regarding his own seven -year -old daughter.

In early September, the judge of the Tagan court, Natalya Larina, sentenced the official of the Ministry of Transport Vladimir Makarov, against whom there was no direct evidence, by 13 years in prison in a maximum regime colony for sexual violence against her own daughter. The verdict caused a storm of indignation in the press, then almost unanimously supporting Makarov. Many lawyers, familiar with the case, at the investigation stage assured the wife of Vladimir Tatyana that the case would obviously fall apart, and would not reach the trial, and if it comes, the acquittal is inevitable.

Judge Larina decided differently. On September 5, she with a tongue twister, lowering her eyes, knocking down, read the indictment to the assembled numerous television cameras, sending a person against whom there was not a single direct evidence of guilt (which the prosecution also recognized), for 13 years in a strict regime colony with the stigma of the pedophile. I wonder how she sleeps?

Makarov said so much about the case and wrote that, it seems, circumstances have long been known to everyone. For those who do not know - the most complete description of the story - on the blog of Denis Gutsko on Snob or inthe investigation of Svetlana Reiters in the magazine Big City .

And now a few words about why I am absolutely sure that Makarov is innocent. First - facts and documents, then a little logic, common sense and emotions.

The prosecution is actually built on three evidence:

1. On the urine analyzes of the child received in the hospital after falling from the Swedish wall, laboratory assistants saw dead spermatozoa (which is refuted by the results of the examinations prescribed by the investigation), and an unknown smear with the surname Mironov, in which expert Isaenko M.V. “With a certain share of certainty” did not exclude the “biological material” of Vladimir Makarov.

2. On the testimony of a children's psychologist from the Ozon center, Leila Sokolova, who saw in the drawings of a small pasta, the phallic symbols (tail in a cat) made a conclusion about the possible “involvement of a girl in sexual relations with a significant adult”

3. On the testimony of private polygraphist Igor Nesterenko, who presented the court conclusions about Makarov’s guilt on the basis of a study conducted by him using a polygraph, a study on which the accused himself insisted, and for which the Makarov family paid 150,000 rubles

The easiest way to prove the absurdity of the testimony of a child psychologist Leila Sokolova, who made her conclusions based on one two -hour conversation with the child.

Even before the bloggers discovered a strange hobby of Sokolova , her conclusion about the phall -shaped tail of a cat looked, to put it mildly, funny. Moreover, other conclusions of psychologists were presented to the court, including those who observed the girl for several months and claimed that the child has sexual development, according to age, and there are no signs of involvement in sexual relations with the father. Sokolova herself admitted in court that the time for communication in the girl was not enough, and inan interview with the magazine the Big City D, in fact, she herself recognized her mistake/

So now, even ardent supporters of Makarov’s accusations do not risk any more to refer to the psychological study of the Ozone Center.

Pretty quickly lost the confidence of Makarov and the polygraph, Nesterenko. As it turned out, Nesterenko recommended Bogdanov’s “fundamental and very competent lawyer”, and he, in turn, recommended a competent polygraphologist Nesterenko. For two, they received 250,000 rubles from Makarov, 150,000 of which went to Nesterenko. Based on the results of the study on the polygraph (on which Makarov himself insisted), Nesterenko concluded about the need for a second study (supposedly the result was ambiguous), for which he already asked for 400,000 rubles (the amount was taken from Makarov himself attached to the case, his wife in court spoke about 300,000 rubles, not counting the share of a lawyer). When the Makarovs, having thought and recognized the cost of such services in the market, refused, Nesterenko wrote a statement to the investigating authorities that he became aware of the crime committed by Makarov. Here is an excerpt from the conclusion in the criminal case of Makarov, made by the Doctor of Law, professor at the department of the criminal process and forensics by Alexei Exarchopul:

With Sokolova and Nesterenko is clear. Now the main argument in favor of the version of Makarov’s guilt is the conclusion of the expert Isaenko No. 942 of 08/23/2010. However, to the accuracy of the interpretation of the results of the molecular genuic examination conducted by Isenko MV, many respected experts have great doubts. For example, excerpts from the conclusion of a specialist in the field of molecular genetics Sergey Khalchitsky:

The main conclusion of Khalchitsky: “In the actions of the expert, Isanko M.V. There is a clear, deliberate falsification of the expert opinion, which is subject to articles 306, 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. ” There is another examination-No. 577-2010 dated 11/22/2010-made by state forensic medical experts led by Ivanov-thereby, which identified the remains of the royal family. The conclusions of the repeated forensic medical examination are as follows: neither on glass with the vaginal contents of the girl, nor on her panties and T-shirt sperm was found. And also: expert data from the previous examination (Isaenko) - “very low quality and do not allow the possibility of a reliable interpretation”

Unfortunately, the chances that the cassation instance will cancel the extremely unjust sentence is extremely small. A system that does not recognize its own mistakes and is configured to accuse anyone who has fallen in her millstone will resist to the last. And she resists. For some time now, Tatyana stopped inviting to television, programs with her participation are removed from the air. Newspapers, who had recently written about the failure of evidence against Vladimir Makarov, now write that everything is difficult and confusing, hinting at the same time that Makarov could well commit what he was imprisoned for . The head of the Moscow City Court, Olga Egorova, at the moment when it is already in the court, which is already informed of her, allows herself completely unacceptable statements, actually threatening Tatyana, that protecting her husband, she risks losing her child . Great choice: refuse to support my husband, or we will take your daughter from you. Bravo, Olga Egorova! Tanya Makarova is a young, attractive, educated woman from a well -secured family. A person for whom the loss of a man - if Makarov was a real “rapist” - certainly would not have become a tragedy and would not mean loneliness until the end of days. The financial well -being of the Makarovs does not last exclusively on the income of the middle -sized official of Vladimir. Tanya has non -poor parents (dad is the deputy head of a large Moscow company), and she herself has been working in recent years. So is it really a wealthy, attractive Tanya, who adores her only daughter, would prove her husband’s innocence in such a disgusting crime that he was charged if he was not 100 percent, that he was not to blame for anything?! The daughter of the Makarovs is the same age and friend of my eldest daughter. When she is in Moscow, she is visiting us, girls play before our eyes for hours. There are no noticeable differences in the reactions, in behavior, games, drawings, conversations of two girls. Once Tanya and I asked them to draw cats - in terms of the experiment - and received very similar drawings in something. Looking at them now, I don’t remember which of them painted which cat. Does this mean that it is time for me to lead my child to some Leila Sokolova? Let me remind you: we are talking about an eight -year -old child: if she had been subjected to the violence mentioned in the verdict, this could not go unnoticed. Everything that happens around the Makarovs is completely disgusting, and has long been beyond good and evil. The worst thing is that we are friends, colleagues, and just indifferent people observing the destruction of a healthy friendly Russian family for the sake of incomprehensible what we do not understand what we can do to help. And this is especially disgusting.

In Russia, a campaign unfolds against “pedophilia”. For real or imaginary sex with minors, they are punished more often and stricter. Publicpost dossier: History of the issue, development of events. >>>