The prison is worse than death

Why did the official chose to end his life on the eve of the sentence and what he wrote in his dying note

Click to increase the picture

Fragments of the dying note of Vladimir Polyutov, left by him to his family on December 5, 2012

“I did not take a dime, did not steal, did not lead from the state. My conscience in front of Him (the state) is pure in front of God. I am ashamed, lie and dodge, thank God, no one before, let the conscience of those who wrote to us in the indictment (from a false understanding of the service) have forced, brought and put an end to us, the virtue of their service and human morality ... ”

Thus begins a dying letter of 58-year-old Vladimir Polyutov, in the past, an official of the Moscow unit of the State Property Ministry of Management, which he left his wife and son on the morning of December 5.

And then he went into the bath and shot himself from the hunting rifle.

Case

On November 29, the collegium of the jury of the Moscow City Court (nine against three) found Vladimir Polyutov and his chief Tatyana Naydenov guilty of “abuse of authority” (Article 286 of Part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Seven jury asked for condescension to the defendants.

They almost did not write about this case: the trial was held closed - in the case there are a lot of documents under the heading “secret”. The next day, November 30, the prosecutor Amalia Strataeva asked Judge Elena Guchenkova to sentenced the defendants Polyutov and Naydenov, who were under the subscription about the lower place, by six and five years of opinion, respectively.

According to investigators, on August 4, 2004, Tatyana Naydenova signed an order “On the terms of privatization of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise“ Stankoimport ”. According to the investigation, the official illegally included in the property complex of this enterprise “Promotions of 19 foreign companies created at the expense of state funds” - this is what is written in the charges. The chairman of the board of directors of the joint -stock company, created on the basis of FSUE “Stankoimport”, was appointed Vladimir Polyutov, who “contrary to the interests of the state” signed the transfer act of the Stankimport property complex on the territorial administration of the minimum permissive. According to investigators, the state was damaged in an amount exceeding 2.5 billion rubles.

The defendants did not admit their guilt either in the investigation or in court. Lawyer Viktor Parshutkin told The New Times that during the investigation, experts involved in the prosecution, said that it was not possible to determine the cost of shares of 16 foreign companies: there are no necessary title documents and documents indicating economic and financial activities at the machine tool.

“Then,” Parshutkin continues, “the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, which is recognized as a victim in this case, turned to an individual entrepreneur, a certain Alexei Timofeev, who has a license of the appraiser. And he wrote in his conclusion that he estimates the shares of these 16 companies at 2 billion rubles more. Meanwhile, even judge Elena Guchenkova did not dare to recognize this dubious document from all points of view by the conclusion of a specialist. She evaluated this document, which was read out by the jury, not as a conclusion, but as a “other document”, but she called a specialist Timofeev not a specialist, but a witness. And on this “other document” of the witness of Timofeev, from which a subscription was not taken on liability for refusal or giving knowingly false testimonies, the charges in terms of the amount of damage caused by Polyutov and Naydenova’s actions were based. ”

Background

“I am not a suicide, I am not running from the shame that overtook me, there is no shame behind me, everyone who lived and worked next to me is known and confirmed! I am leaving a life that I love, and I want to live no less than those bastards who brought me to this line. Aratsky, Lomovtsev /.../ Maria Eduardovna Semenenko - this B ... D and disgrace, like the whole crap system of the prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation, who, for the sake of burning out their own reputation, are ready to go to any vice in order to close their eyes to their rotten and conquered system. "

Who are these people whom a person accuses of his tragedy, who will shoot himself in the chest after a few minutes?

In 2004, Dmitry Aratsky was the deputy head of the Agency for the Management of Federal Property (Rosimustra), then, until June 2009 - Deputy Minister of Regional Development of the Russian Federation. “It was Aratsky who had the authority to dispose of the shares of 19 foreign companies on behalf of the Russian Federation,” explains Parshutkin’s lawyer. - In court, Aratsky said that, considering that the shares are unlawfully included in the authorized capital, on February 18, 2005 he wrote a letter to Polyutov, asked him to eliminate violations (though not indicating how he should do this) and return the shares to the state. But Polyutov, by law, did not possess such powers. It was the prerogative of the Aratsky himself. Protection evaluates his testimony as obviously false. But they were the basis of the prosecution. ”

The second name called Polyutov is Dmitry Lomovtsev, investigator of the RF IC.

“The purpose of our criminal prosecution was the desire of a certain group of persons to return the office building on 34/63 Obruchev Street, which once belonged to the Stankoimport,” Tatyana Naydenova told The New Times. - At one time, this building was sold for debts. It was impossible to recognize the privatization of illegal, otherwise by condemning us: it was necessary to prove that we illegally included 19 foreign companies in the authorized capital. Then it turned out that the privatization of the "Stankoimport" was carried out with violations. And this means that it could be recognized as illegal and all subsequent transactions, including a transaction for the sale of a building on 34/63 Obruchev Street. ”

Maria Semenenko is another name in Polyutov’s suicide note: an employee of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, who supported the charges of this process. She participated in many high -profile cases: she was an accusation in the process of the murder of the Spartak fan Yegor Sviridov, now he is participating in the murder of Yuri Budanov.

“This whole story has been stretching since August 2009,” says Tatyana Naydenova. And I and Polyutov, we have never pleaded guilty. A few days before the verdict, Polyutov went to the State Duma Committee under the legislation and showed all the documents there in our case. Returning from there, he told me: “Tanya, the lawmakers say that we did not violate the law, and it is not true that as a result of our signature, the state lost 2.5 billion rubles: after all, the entire authorized capital, which transferred from the FSUE“ Stankoimport ”to the Stankimport joint -stock company, was preserved on the balance sheet of this joint -stock company. The shares that were issued 100% belonged to the state. If they wanted to, they could return the money to the treasury. ”

Office building at the address: Moscow, 34/63 Obrucheva Street, once belonged to Stankoimport.

Jury

“I am not to blame for anyone and to anyone, the jury, who did not understand the essence of the matter and allowed themselves to deceive, this is their fault and responsibility to God” ...

According to Naydenova, they deliberately chose that their case was considered in the jury. “Vladimir hoped,” says Naydenova, “that ordinary people will understand that we are illegally held accountable. But after the verdict was issued, he realized that they would imprison us. And then, apparently, he decided: he will write a suicide note, kill himself and, perhaps, in this way will be justified: people will hear and understand that he is not to blame. We are not scams, we don’t care. Do you think I was not offered to run abroad? Those who proposed did not believe when I said that I had nowhere to run. They did not believe that for so many years I worked as an official and I have no castle in France. ”

As early as November 27, before the debate of the parties began, Vladimir Polyutov noticed that something was wrong with the jury. He wrote a letter to the Moscow City Court, drawing attention to the fact that the three jurors - Golovko Irina Yuryevna, jury under No. 1, Zhuravlev Nikolai Vladimirovich, the juggle under No. 7 and Samoilova Marina Yuryevna, the jury under No. 8 “at the hearing admit expressions in support of the position of the prosecution and admit disapproving statements to the defense representatives.” Polyutov considered that they could be "initially interested in the outcome of the case in favor of the prosecution." I received no answer to his letter from the Moscow City Court.

After the suicide of his client, the lawyer Parshutkin in an interview with the press said that he hopes that one of the jury who participated in the case would somehow respond and express his attitude to the tragedy that had happened.

And so it happened: he was called one of the jury - Ksenia Nikolaev. True, she did not participate in the verdict: she was among the spare ones, but participated in the discussion of the case in the jury throughout the process. The New Times contacted Nikolaeva, she confirmed that she was shocked by the jury verdict - “guilty”: “In my opinion, the fault of the defendants was not proved,” she said. - In any case, Polyutov’s actions could be qualified as negligence, and not as an excess of official powers. During the process, the prosecutors sat closer to the jury, and we heard their caustic comments on the defendants, who, by law, the assessors should not have heard. Questions to the jury, formulated by the judge, and her parting word seemed to me some one-sided: the judge reminded of evidence from the prosecution, but it seems, did not say anything about the arguments of the defense. The jury trusted the prosecution. The prosecutors convinced them that the defendants were guilty, and the jury agreed with this. Moreover, discussing the matter, most of them said that officials cannot be honest by definition. Among the jury were pensioners, but there were people who seemed to be engaged in business. They were quite unanimous. True, there was one jury from the main composition, which was inclined to justification. Together with him, we tried to somehow convince the rest. But if he was allowed to express his opinion, then no one seriously perceived my arguments, because I was too young for them. I am 32 years old". "

I am leaving a life that I love and want to live no less than the bastards who brought me to this line

”The day after Polyutov’s suicide, a letter came to the email address of his lawyer:“ I bring my condolences to you and the family of the deceased. I hope that the rest of the jury will serve as a lesson. Everyone was configured by the formula: since the official, thief. My attempts to prove the failure of the accusation in terms of the free interpretation of Decree No. 14 (from the case materials. - The News. Times did not want to listen to anything. We will be equal in court with respect.
The author of the letter could not be installed.
Sentence
"If anyone thinks that I was chopped, he was sick, left the problems, let him try ..."
Tatyana Naydenova says: “I believe that Polyutova’s act is a feat. He has a wife, whom he loved very much. Son. He wanted to protect his name and name of his family. As for me, I'm not like a prison. I have not been living for a long time. All these years I and my relatives, we live in hell. I don't know what will happen to me ... "
PS December 5, on the day when Vladimir Polyutov took the scores of life, Judge Guchenkova did not announce the verdict. She returned the trial to the previous stage. On December 14, in the Moscow City Court, the requirements of the civil plaintiff - the department of cases of the administration of the President of the Russian Federation on compensation for damage will be discussed. The date of the sentence is unknown. However, Polyutov does not care.

Photo: Natalia Platonova