"I was told that he is a killer"

In the case of the murder of Anna, the Politkovsky side of the prosecution finishes to submit evidence

By the middle of the process, the defendants began to be noticeably nervous - they are increasingly breaking into direct insults to the judges, prosecutors and witnesses, and even their lawyers do not always manage to calm customers. As a result, the presiding judge Melekhin laid a note from the jury, who asked to put things in order in the hall, because due to the constant cries of the inhabitants of the Aquarium and the high-profile comments of the defense, it is difficult for them to perceive the information. But I must say that the jury is very carefully monitoring what is happening in the hall, not being distracted for a second.

On Monday, the former head of the Department of the Moscow State Pedagogical University of Moscow (Outdois) Dmitry Pavlyuchenkov, convicted of the murder of Anna Politkovskaya, was returned to the court. However, the interrogation as such did not work out-for the majority of the questions a witness (recall that the deal with the investigation-and whether it was time to cancel it) refused to answer, citing the 51st article of the Constitution.

I had to announce the testimony given to them at the preliminary investigation, including in 2011 - in them he reported that Khadzhikurbanov, and not the defendant Gaitukaev, were offering him to follow Politkovskaya, as he stated last week in court. The witness explained the disagreement by the fact that he was afraid of the criminal authority of Gaitukaev, but confirmed that he first heard the surname of Politkovskaya from Khadzhikurbanov when he came for the money that Gaitukaev transferred to prepare for the murder.

According to investigators, Gaitukaev allocated 150 thousand dollars for these needs. Of this amount, three thousand Pavlyuchenkov issued the police to his subordinates - for “hack”, that is, surveillance of the “object”. At the request of Gaitukaev, another ten thousand dollars transferred to Rustam Makhmudov, and the remaining 137 thousand demanded by Khadzhikurbanov, who “took control” when Gaitukaev was arrested ( in the case of attempted murder of Ukrainian businessman Korban ).

As a result, Khadzhikurbanov could not stand it in the presence of jury (which is prohibited by law) began to be indignant that Pavlyuchenkov was changing the testimony of as gloves at each interrogation - another scandal erupted. And the judge, after several warnings and preventive tapping with a hammer, removed the defendant from the hall to three meetings. “You are a bastard,” Khadzhikurbanov shouted when he was taken away. “And the next time I tell you the same!”

When everything was subsided, Pavlyuchenkov talked a little more: on the video from the surveillance cameras on Lesnaya Street, where Politkovskaya lived, the witness recognized our murdered observer. He also recognized a man leaving her entrance: “I am 80 percent sure that these are Makhmudov Ruslan Ruslanovich.” According to Pavlyuchenkov, the man was like the defendant, who the investigation accuses of direct performance of the murder, the “figure of a wrestler”, the location of his shoulders - “with low sloping”.

... Former National Bolsheviks, and now journalist Roman Popkov in 2006-2008, was sitting in Butyrskaya prison (for participating in a political action), where he met Oleg Golubovich (he was arrested for complicity in the theft) - now a key witness in the case of the murder of Politkovskaya. After the release, they periodically called up. Golubovich knew that Popkov was freely working in Novaya Gazeta, and therefore in 2010 he told his former cellmate that he was familiar with people involved in the murder of Politkovskaya, and asked to arrange a meeting with representatives of the newspaper.

“He was very excited, said that he was afraid for life, because those who are involved in the murder can eliminate him,” Popkov said. As a result, he introduced Golubovich to the deputy chief editor of Novaya Sergey Sokolov. From the story of Golubovich it followed that he had long known Pavlyuchenkov and was very informed about his activities. And in July 2006, Lieutenant Colonel Pavlyuchenkov suggested that Golubovich follow the “journalist”, but he refused. According to Golubovich, it was Pavlyuchenkov, who at that time went on the case with an ordinary witness and was even under state protection, organized external observation of the newspaper of the “new” at the request of the criminal authority of Gaitukaev and attracted his subordinates - full -time employees of the Moscow State Autonomous Okrug, Lebedev and others. And also, Golubovich said, he witnessed the transfer of Pavlyuchenkov pistol with a silencer to the future killer.

The lawyers of the defendants were interested in: what promised New Gazeta Golubovich for such testimonies and why did he go to the editor, and not to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB and the UK? Actually, Sergey Sokolov himself, who planned to interrogate after these questions, could answer these questions, but at first it turned out before his interrogation that Dzhabrail Makhmudov SARVI and “serious weakness”. During the break, doctors examined the defendant, measured the temperature (36.4) and decided: it can participate in the meeting. Then it turned out that the only lawyer Rustam Makhmudov (Nail) should urgently need to leave for family reasons. And in the middle of the working day a break was announced until tomorrow.

... The deputy chief editor of Novaya, Sergei Sokolov fully satisfied the curiosity of the defendants and their protection. At the meeting, Oleg Golubovich explained that he did not trust the official investigation, which does not want to arrest Pavlyuchenkov, and is afraid of revenge from former acquaintances, but is ready to tell that he knows, “Novaya Gazeta”. For his testimony, he asked to help him change the country of residence.

To the clarifying question from the Aquarium, who was afraid of Golovich, the witness answered: "You, Lom-Ali Akhmadovich, first of all." "Thank you, he is afraid of me!" - Instantly reacted Gaitukaev.

“He was afraid of Rustam Makhmudov, who was also free, was afraid of Pavlyuchenkov and did not trust law enforcement agencies,” Sokolov finished thought.

From the further story it followed that Golubovich and his family eventually helped to go abroad, where a lawyer survey was held for a video. And later, Golubovich confirmed his testimony to representatives of the investigation, being questioned in the Russian embassy.

According to Sokolov, Golubovich said that after removing the employees of the PU from the surveillance of the journalist, “Chechens, Loma relatives” began to monitor. In addition, in the summer of 2006, Pavlyuchenkov asked Golubovich to take him to the Begovoy district, where a certain Vladimir (already interrogated in court) took a gun with a muffler, which an unknown person immediately took away then. When Golubovich asked who it was, they answered him - a killer. Already during the lawyer survey, Golubovich, having looked at the photographs presented to him, identified the man who took the murder weapon, was Rustam Mahmudov.

Rustam (whom Naille knew under the name) Golubovich met twice more: he transferred money at the request of Pavlyuchenkov. And in mid-October 2006 (after the murder), when Pavlyuchenkov, Golubovich and their common friend of Chervonia-Ogly celebrated some family holiday in the Lyubertsy cafe, Pavlyuchenkov in passing said: "Nail worked in the journalist, do not call his number anymore."

In addition, in November-December 2006, Golubovich drove the money several times and Khadzhikurbanov-Pavlyuchenkov explained to him as follows: "Gaitukaev sat down, Hajik instead of him."

Witness Sokolov told the court that Golubovich himself could not personally appear at the meeting, because, firstly, he fears for his life, and secondly, submitted documents for the provision of asylum and did not have the right to leave the country of stay. Therefore, he sent an application to the address of Novaya Gazeta with a request to transfer the envelope to the court.

Judge Melekhin opened the envelope without jury: there was a Golubovich’s statement that he could not be present in court personally, but fully confirms his testimonies given at the stage of the preliminary investigation, and asks to be announced in court. After a small skirmish - the presence of Golubovich in court is fundamentally for everyone - this statement was attached to the case file.

And again - a scandal, the meaning of which is to discredit the figure of the witness of Golubovich himself. For example, lawyers wondered: did he not participate in the murder? To which Sokolov answered unequivocally: “If there was blood on his hands, the“ New Gazeta ”would never have to cooperate with him.”

... The most spectacular in last week was a performance, which prosecutors arranged for the jury, using the son of Anna Politkovskaya Ilya. On the large map of the district, he marked the route, which his mother usually drove home from the garden ring: through the streets of Fadeeva, Alexander Nevsky to Lesnaya. The state prosecutor Maria Semenenko announced the Billing data of the phone number belonging to Dzhabrail Makhmudov (he himself confirmed this in court), for October 7, 2006 with an updated location. It turned out: from 14.28 to 16.08, the subscriber was in the area of the intersection of Lesnaya and Alexander Nevsky streets. And on the video from the surveillance cameras, which was immediately shown the jury, one could see that all this time there was a blue-green “four” from which the killer came out. And a few minutes later, Anna Politkovskaya drove the car. According to the investigation, the other defendant - Ibrahim Makhmudov - stood in a bend from the garden ring to Fadeev Street and announced the approach of the victim by telephone (this is also Billing data).

... Witness Viktor Potapov, his native uncle of convicted Dmitry Pavlyuchenkov, who told the jury, completed the week of work, who told the jury that in the fall of 2006 the nephew asked him to give him by car in Yasenevo to meet with Khadzhikurbanov. Pavlyuchenkov had a small package or a dark bag with him. The meeting took place without Potapov, who was left in the car. Half an hour later, Pavlyuchenkov returned, he no longer had bags/bag with him. “That's all,” Potapov summed up.

The defense asked the judge to return to the process of Khadzhikurbanov - since there are questions. Returned. The defendant said that in the bag/bag handed to him there was only a “bottle of wine”. But the Witness of Protopov denied this, according to him, "there was something resembling a parallelepiped." All these details are important because the investigation is confident: Pavlyuchenkov then transferred to Khadzhikurbanov the very 137 thousand dollars issued to prepare for the murder.

Having overcome the noisy disputes that took half a day, the prosecutors showed Viktor Potapov a video of his nephew, who told the investigation that in the fall of 2006 he tried to “jump” with surveillance of the journalist, but Khadzhikurbanov abruptly cut him off: “What are you?! Here such people are tied up ... Yes, they will erase you. "

Further - scandals again. Due to the intention of prosecutors to announce the written testimony of Oleg Golubovich. Lawyers and Aquarium insisted that "Golubovich must speak in court so that his permits to manifest here."

- “New Gazeta” is Golubovich's guarantor. The newspaper has the opportunity to buy him a ticket and invite him here! - noisy Gaitukaev. To which the judge explained that Golubovich is a citizen of another state, and no one could interrogate him against his will, and then the presiding judge himself became a victim of verbal attacks.

“Distract from the phone, your honor,” the lawyer Musaev demanded, hinting that the judge is busy with something else instead of the process.

“You can come to me and see that I have a criminal code on my phone,” Melekhin answered this.

- Yes, at least the Qur'an or the Bible! -snapped the lawyer, but for some reason did not approach the judge. But Khadzhikurbanov was adjusted into the dispute:

- And show us the Sesames of your incoming - from the prosecutors.

“You would have cared about your telephone detail,” the prosecutor Semenenko retorted.

“You went to ...” Khadzhikurbanov broke up once again. But prosecutors did not raise a noise on this subject.