Navalny's trial. Day thirteen

Hearings of the Kirovles case continue in the Leninsky Court of Kirov. On Tuesday the last “technical” volumes of the case were read. PublicPost broadcast the thirteenth day of the trial.

15:28 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Despite all the defense's arguments, the judge announces a break until 10:30 on June 13.

15:26 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The defense is ready to move on to presenting evidence at the next hearing. When asked by the judge what is stopping her from starting to interrogate the defendants now, Davydova referred to another provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, according to which defendants should have enough time to prepare for their defense.

The judge announced a break until 10:30 the day after tomorrow, June 13.

Mikhailova says that this is impossible, the lawyers and defendants have subpoenas for these dates - she and Navalny should be in Moscow on the 13th.

Photo: RAPSI

Now lawyer Kobzev stands up - he also has subpoenas - to the Tverskoy court on June 20 and on June 19 at 10 o'clock to the Basmanny court. And on Friday, June 14, Kobzev had business in the Basmanny Court.

14:58 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

The court hearing was adjourned until 15:20.

14:57 Anna Veduta, press secretary of Alexei Navalny

The officers emphasize that he WANTS TO GIVE TESTIMONY - extensive and exhaustive, but at his own stage. Now this is a violation of the law.

Navalny also emphasizes that a) he has repeatedly testified, b) he plans to continue to do so, but according to the line of defense at the right stage.

14:56 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Davydov to the prosecutors: “What you are offering us is tantamount to if you called Opalev on the 25th, and we said - let us interrogate him first.”

Prosecutors then ask the court to allow the testimony of the defendants given during the preliminary investigation to be read out. Davydova objects: this is illegal, unreasonable and premature. If they are allowed to be announced now, “the procedure for presenting evidence by the defense will be devalued, the right of the accused to defense will be violated, which will entail a fundamental violation of the law.”

The sparring between Davydova and Blinov around the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure has become a tradition of this process.

14:51 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Prosecutors propose moving on to interrogating Navalny and Ofitserov. The defense counters: “We planned to do it later.” “The law classifies the testimony of defendants as evidence for the defense,” explains Davydova. “We expect to interrogate the defendants when the defense presents its evidence.”

Navalny: “I will be happy to testify and answer all questions, but at the stage at which the defense has planned it.”

Ofitserov stated the same thing.

The prosecution still wants to interrogate the accused - as part of presenting their evidence in the case. The judge says that the defendants refuse to testify.

Davydova argues: there is an article of the Code of Criminal Procedure, according to which the defendants are questioned first by defense attorneys, then by the prosecution, then by the court.

14:47 Anna Veduta, press secretary of Alexei Navalny

Objection to the judge's actions. At this stage, the prosecution's request to interrogate the defendants cannot be granted - it violates the rights of the defense. In the Criminal Procedure Code: the accused are questioned first by defense lawyers. Questioning by the prosecution before the defense is a violation of the law.

14:44 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Blinov denies the request and invites the prosecution to proceed to interrogation of the defendants. Prosecutors decide to interrogate Navalny first; he assures that he himself is not against testifying, but the defense does not allow it.

14:40 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The judge is in the room, but you can’t hear him very well. Blinov always speaks quietly, too quietly in the opinion of most listeners, but here he seems to have outdone himself.

Photo: Maria Eismont

14:33 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

The wait for Blinov is dragging on.

13:52 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Blinov again takes time to think. A break was announced until 14:20.

13:50 Anna Veduta, press secretary of Alexei Navalny

Judge Blinov does not like the fact that the defense is filing a motion after a motion was filed to prevent the announcement of Opalev’s sentence.

13:39 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Mikhailov’s lawyer: “The verdict of the Leninsky District Court dated December 24, 2012 (in relation to Opalev) cannot be used as admissible evidence in this trial for the following reasons: the verdict affects the rights and legitimate interests of Navalny and Ofitserov. The verdict was passed without examining and evaluating the evidence Finding Opalev guilty, the court repeatedly uses language indicating that Opalev committed the crime together with N. and O.” (Mikhailova gives numerous examples from the verdict, which mention N. and O., with whom Opalev “entered into a criminal conspiracy”).

Photo: RAPSI

13:37 Anna Veduta, press secretary of Alexei Navalny

The defense reads out quotes from the verdict against Opalev, formulated in the form of a statement that N. and O. committed a crime. This is illegal.

Guilt can only be proven in court, but in Opalev’s case, which was separated into separate proceedings, N. and O. were not participants and could not defend themselves.

13:34 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Lawyer Olga Mikhailova believes that evidence obtained in violation of the law is unacceptable.

13:32 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The trial resumed. The defense reads out another motion to exclude evidence.

13:08 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Blinov reads out the ruling on the defense's motion to declare the evidence inadmissible.

According to him, there are no grounds for granting this request.

Refuse.

Photo: RAPSI

A 15-minute break was announced.

13:01 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

The break is over. Let's continue.

Photo: RAPSI

12:50 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

As Navalny's supporters picket at the puppet theater, lines of children often pass by the stands. The reaction to what is happening depends entirely on the teachers accompanying the children's excursions.

Photo: Maria Eismont

Some cast angry glances at the stands and ask the children to go faster and not linger, others take the badges themselves, hand them out to the children and allow them to “take it home for their parents.”

Photo: Maria Eismont

12:39 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Vitaly and Anna are entrepreneurs from Kokshetau, a city of 140 thousand in Kazakhstan, owners of three small shops. They came for a week to support Navalny, they have been following the process from the very beginning.

— Are many people in Kazakhstan interested in the Kirovles case?

“Approximately the same as in Russia,” Vitaly is sure. “We have the same percentage of people who care.”

Photo: Maria Eismont

Anna says that she herself was recently in Alexey’s shoes - she and her friend were tried for allegedly attacking a woman at a rally that entrepreneurs organized to protest against a sharp increase in water and heat tariffs. “There was no attack, and a bunch of video cameras recorded it, and the “victim” was one of the provocateurs,” says Anna. As a result, the court was forced to acquit her. The case was closed.

Photo: Maria Eismont

“It’s strange, here people walk down the street wearing “Putin is a thief” T-shirts, and nothing. In Kazakhstan, they would already be lying face down on the asphalt,” says Vitaly.

12:10 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Activists continue to distribute leaflets to passers-by. They claim that Kirov residents’ awareness of Navalny’s trial has increased sharply.

Photo: Maria Eismont

According to my observations, leaflets and badges are taken every other time, someone silently refuses, and then Lyaskin, if he is in the mood, sees off the passerby with the words: “Don’t be afraid! These people will leave, but your conscience will remain with you!” or “Why don’t you want to take the badge?!” Others take it, some express words of support. “You just have to wear this badge. Always,” Lyaskin clarifies with a smile.

10:30 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

The court is removed to make a decision on declaring the evidence inadmissible. Break until 13:00.

10:25 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Lawyers for the accused object to the inclusion in the case of documents announced by prosecutors regarding witnesses.

Davydova: “Firstly, this is a fax copy, we have not seen the originals. The defense filed a motion to exclude the evidence protocols on May 21, today is June 11. During this time, it was possible to present the originals or invite these people.”

Kobzev: “It’s unlikely that these people are following the process; why did they suddenly start taking certificates and enclosing passports right now?”

Prosecutor Cheremisin: “Unfortunately, the originals have not yet arrived. As soon as they arrive, we will present them. I do not think that the defense has any reason to doubt the authenticity of the documents.”

Mikhailova: “The defense has reason to doubt the authenticity of the documents. Thus, the certificate provided to Tarasyan states that he is in the barracks at the address: Volochaevskaya, 4/3, although in the previous version his address was: Moscow, Yunnatov Street.” .

Photo: RAPSI

10:21 Alexey Navalny

The “witness” Torasyan SUDDENLY sent a certificate to the court that he was real, and AGAIN INDICATED ANOTHER ADDRESS, not the same as in the protocol.

10:11 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Prosecutors announced they had finished presenting evidence. Now they would like to present to the court “documents refuting the defense’s arguments.” We are talking about the story of the witnesses (yesterday the defense accused them of indicating non-existent addresses in the protocol).

“Such people exist; they were actually present during the inspection,” says the prosecutor. They provided copies of passports, which the prosecutor provides to the court. Their registration addresses are different, but since both are studying at the Military University at the Faculty of Investigation, the protocol indicated the addresses of the barracks, which are not indicated in the BTI."

Davydov's lawyer: "Did you just come up with this yourself?"

The defense asked for time to familiarize itself with the documents provided by prosecutors.

09:56 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

During the break, the lawyers argue that there can be no prejudice, because neither Navalny nor Officers participated in Opalev’s case, did not have the opportunity to testify, etc. But they confirm that the reading of the verdict to Opalev is intended to announce what was allegedly proven by those who entered into the fact of theft by a court decision.

09:45 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The prosecutor declares that all the evidence has been read out, except for those that they forgot to read out from volume 4. He asks permission to read out the missing documents.

Photo: RAPSI

While the defense determines its attitude to the disclosure of these documents, Judge Blinov announced a break of 10 minutes.

09:44 Alexey Navalny

The district police officer informs the court that there have been no complaints or statements from neighbors against me.

09:39 Alexey Navalny

The court was just read a police report on Ofitserov, in which they reported that Ofitserov takes part in the life of his home.

09:36 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The marriage certificate of Ofitserov with his wife Lida and the birth certificates of the children are announced (“in the column the father is Ofitserov Pyotr Yuryevich”).

09:28 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Prosecutors read out the protocol for obtaining Ofitserov's speech samples for comparative research (for comparison with voices on wiretaps).

Photo: RAPSI

09:27 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

"...found guilty under Part 4 of Article 160, sentenced to 4 years in prison. The punishment is considered suspended with a probationary period of three years. Appear once a month to register..."

Prosecutors finished reading Opalev's sentence. Go to volume 27 (there are 30 in total).

09:12 Alexey Navalny

Funny. They read out the verdict to Opalev, in which they call me “N”. Like, it’s unclear about whom and it doesn’t infringe on my rights as an accused.

09:09 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

“Opalev,” the prosecutor reads the verdict to the former director of Kirovles, “entered into a criminal conspiracy with N. and O. aimed at embezzlement”... “Implementation of N.’s criminal plan...”

N. and O. are, of course, Navalny and Officers. The guilty verdict has entered into legal force, that is, the fact of criminal conspiracy with N. and O. is considered proven. All that remains is to indicate who is hiding behind these letters, although everything is already clear to everyone.

09:08 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

Quote from yesterday's motion by the defense to exclude Opalev's sentence from the case file:

“We believe that the sentence passed against V.N. Opalev cannot have legal significance when considering the criminal case against A.A. Navalny and P.Yu. Ofitserov, since:

- passed without the participation of A.A. Navalny and P.Yu. Ofitserova in violation of the principle of presumption of innocence;
- in accordance with Article 74 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, it is not evidence in a criminal case;
- issued in the manner prescribed by Article 317.7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, 316 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, without a trial and without examination and evaluation of the evidence collected in the case, in connection with the conclusion of V.N. Opalev pre-trial cooperation agreement and agreement with the charges.
In addition, during the judicial investigation, the study of the verdict against V.N. Opalev, who entered into a pre-trial agreement, will require the court to comply with the requirements of Articles 17 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, which provide for the court’s obligation to evaluate this verdict as evidence in the case from the point of view of its relevance, admissibility and reliability, which clearly goes beyond the powers of the trial court considering criminal case against A.A. Navalny and P.Yu. Ofitserova.
Accordingly, the verdict against V.N. Opalev, sentenced in accordance with Chapter 40.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, cannot be read out and examined during this judicial investigation.”

09:03 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

The thirteenth day of the trial began with Judge Blinov, having ascertained the positions of the parties, allowing Opalev to be sentenced. Prosecutors began announcing the verdict - the former director of Kirovles received this sentence (4 years probation) in a special manner - fully admitting guilt in a trial without a judicial investigation.

Based on this verdict, as lawyers believe, in accordance with the principle of prejudice, the fact of the theft of timber worth 16 million rubles is considered proven, which may form the basis for the verdict against Navalny and Ofitserov, against whom Opalev testified.

08:57 Daniil Kolomiychuk/PublicPost

The day before the hearing ended with the defense asking to exclude the sentence of the former director of Kirovles Opalev from the case. According to lawyer Mikhailova, he was sentenced in violation of the principles of the presumption of innocence.

08:53 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

Let's start our broadcast. Stands with local campaigning at the courthouse.

Photo: Maria Eismont

08:50 Maria Eismont/PublicPost

This morning, only Navalny’s supporters are in front of the court; opponents with their traditional picket at the post office across the road are not visible.

Photo: Maria Eismont

The picketers are photographed by a person whom they unconditionally consider to be an operative.

Photo: Maria Eismont

According to investigators, Alexey Navalny, a member of the opposition Coordination Council, blogger, creator of the RosPil and RosZhKH projects, organized the theft of timber in 2009, when he was an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region. Together with the director of Vyatka Forestry Company LLC, Pyotr Ofitserov , and the general director of KOGUP Kirovles, Vyacheslav Opalev, he stole 10 thousand cubic meters of forest products from May to September 2009, the Investigative Committee says. As a result, the Kirov region missed more than 16 million rubles from the budget.

Navalny was accused of organizing a large embezzlement of someone else's property (Article 33, Article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), Ofitserov - of complicity (Article 33, Article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Vyacheslav Opalev admitted guilt and decided to make a deal with the investigation, so his criminal case was investigated separately. As a result, the court found the general director of Kirovles guilty, and the whole process is based on his confession.