On May 8, a meeting was to be held in the Chertanovsky court dedicated to the request of the investigator Smirnov on the restriction of Daniil Konstantinov to familiarize himself with the case. It should be recalled that Daniil Konstantinov was accused of murder, while there was no evidence of his involvement in the murder, nevertheless, the case was brought to the court and only at the stage of the decision, on December 26, 2013, Judge Galina Turkina decided to return the case to the prosecutor's office. The case was sent for the investigation, which was completed on April 29. Konstantinov all this time remained in custody. The Advocat Konstantinov Valery Shkred told the OVD-Info that on May 4, investigator Smirnov brought judicial volumes from the 12th to 16th to the "sailor's silence", where Konstantinov is located. The lawyer asked where the 17th and subsequent volumes, since these volumes should have data regarding additional investigation. The investigator replied that the 17th volume was not yet ready. According to lawyer Shkred, this means that the investigation began to fulfill the requirements of Article 217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to familiarize the accused and his defender with the materials of the criminal case. On the next day, the investigator called lawyers to familiarize himself with the case file, but on the morning of May 5, the volume was not ready, and Shkred, the only one of the four lawyers Konstantinov, was able to see him only in the only way In the afternoon. The most accused was presented on May 17 on May 6, but Konstantinov had not yet reached the reading of this volume, since all this time he studied the volumes regarding what was happening in the Chertanovsky court during the first consideration of his case-unlike lawyers, Konstantinov was deprived of the opportunity to get acquainted with the court volumes directly in court. All additional investigative actions were set out in the 17th volume, and the lawyer Shkred retold on the OVD-Info, what new data is contained in it, which allowed the investigation to declare the completion of the pre-investigation, and, therefore, the preparation for new court hearings. The following lasted about two and a half months. During this time, an employee of the metro, the Street of Academician Youngel Street, next to which was accused of Konstantinov, was interrogated. The duty officer explained where the southern lobby is located, what is the name of the place where the fight occurred, explained also how part of the nearby territory belongs to the Moscow Metro. But at the same time, she does not know anything about the murder itself. In addition, the witness Alexander Petrov was repeatedly interrogated, who was next to the crime scene and saw someone pursued Alexei Temnikov (whose murder was accused of Konstantinov), and how Temnikov fell. Petrov tried to provide first aid to Temnikov, called an ambulance and the police. During the second interrogation, which was carried out with the departure to the crime scene, Petrov indicated exactly where Temnikov discovered and where the company was located, which pursued him. At the same time, Petrov did not remember any of the attackers. That, in fact, is all. No other investigative actions were carried out in the case. “I have a question for a witness to Smirnov: was there such a need for more than two months to pull the investigation to carry out two such simple investigative actions? - Shecred is perplexed. “It was possible to do this in a week.” On May7, Konstantinov was awarded a notification that on May 8 at 12:00 in the Chertanovsky court the investigator’s request would be considered a restriction in familiarization with the materials of the criminal case. Investigator Smirnov announced this to lawyer Shkred on the phone. It was about Konstantinov to stop getting acquainted with the case materials on May 12. Shkred arrived in the Chertanovsky court in the evening of May 7, where he was informed that they had no petition and nothing was appointed at 12:00 p.m. on 12:00. At the same time, the lawyer was confirmed in the investigative isolator that on May 8, Daniil Konstantinov was transferred to the Chertanovsky court. It is clear that just no one would be transferred to it, but by the end of the working day on May 7, no one brought a petition to the court. They did not bring the petition on the morning of May 8. Investigator Smirnov arrived only at 13:30 and said that he would now give the petition to the judge. At 13:40, the convoy delivered Konstantinov, they knocked on the door of different courtrooms and offices, but they were not opened, after which Konstantinov was returned to the convoy room. Then, as the father of the accused Ilya Konstantinov says on the blog, one of the halls opened, but they began to start under investigation in other cases there. At 14:00, the petition was still not received by the Criminal Court’s office, but the lawyer Shkred was told that he would not go anywhere-the office staff suggested that in the evening the consideration of the petition would still take place. Only at the fourth hour of the day it became known that the petition was received by Judge Irina Ermishin studying him. It should be recalled that this was a festive day, and the official time of the court’s work had already ended by this time. To the journalist Vladimir Schreydler, who constantly covers the case of Konstantinov in court, the bailiffs approached and, saying that the court stops his work, demanded to remove the camera, although he had permission to shoot. He had to remove the camera, but he continued to shoot what was happening on a mobile phone. After about half an hour, the bailiffs demanded that the people who were waiting for the start of the meeting leave the building, otherwise physical strength and special equipment would be applied to them. It was also threatened by drawing up a protocol and arrest. Since the bailiffs did not present any documents, people remained to sit, after which the bailiffs began to be removed by force. The closest relatives of Daniil Konstantinov got especially: his wife Marina Ionov, according to her, was put on the floor and almost broke her hand, Konstantinova Sr. Four bailiffs were taken out into the street and thrown into the porch. The force was applied to Schreidler and other people. (Previously, it was noted, in particular, a member of the Moscow Public Supervisory Commission, Anna Karetnikova, which is compared to what is happening in other Moscow district courts, the bailiffs of the Chertanovsky court behave correctly and carefully to the public. Meanwhile, on the day of the decision on the case of Konstantinov on December 26, it became known that he was beaten in the convoy in the convoy premises.) [[{"Type": "Media", "View_Mode": "Media_large", "FID": "4569", "Attributes": {"Alt ":" "," Class ":" Media-Image "," Height ":" 360 "," Typeof ":" Foaf: Image "," Width ":" 480 "}]] photo:] The blog of Ilya Konstantinovavskor after people were taken out (and some were thrown out) from the building, investigator Smirnov and the prosecutor entered the court. Meanwhile, the lawyer Shkred was finally given the opportunity to get acquainted with the request of the investigator. And the lawyer to his horror found that the petition for restriction in familiarization with the materials of the criminal case was dated not on May 7, but on May 8; approved by the head of the Investigative Department in the Southern Administrative District Dmitry Pavlov, too, on May 8; Adopted for the proceedings by the judge of the Chertanovsky court, too, on May 8; And - most importantly! - Assigned for a hearing at the hearing of the Chertanovsky court, too, on May 8, at 18:30. Thus, formally, everything was decided only on May 8, which means that they simply would not have time to notify any of the lawyers. According to Shkred, neither in judicial practice, nor in law practice, it is customary to inform the court session directly on the day of its implementation - the exception is only the consideration of the issue of detention. “These are such violations that it is no longer called,” Shkred says. - How can you call at the hearing if the petition is not signed?! And if the head of the investigative body had not approved this petition? Would everyone get together and disperse? And would the defendant be wasted? I was informed that the meeting was scheduled for a while for which the court did not appoint. Formally, I was in the Chertanovsky court building for six hours just like that. I can still understand that the investigator could sign the investigator from the head of the investigating authority and transfer to court. But for the court to appoint on the same day - this is generally for the first time. Moreover, the meeting was scheduled for the time when the work of the court had already ended and people must leave the premises, that is, the possibility of the public entering the courtroom is excluded. Why this was done, of course. For what purpose people were so hard to throw out of the court premises, it is clear. There is only one uninhabited question: the main court hearing in the Daniil case will also be held for the second time? ”The people who suffered from the actions of the convoy called the police and the ambulance, wrote statements about the beatings and went to the Nagorno police department. The people who remained in the court, including Schreidler, the bailiffs pushed out the gate under the pretext that they interfere with the work of the convoy. At the same time, one of the bailiffs accused Schreidler of attacking him (at that time Schradler was shooting), and claimed that he did not interfere with the work of the journalist. The ADVOKTOTH SHKRED went to the ATS with the victims, and the meeting began without him. At the same time, the lawyer noted that the court did not set the task of holding a meeting in the absence of a lawyer: they called Shkred and asked where he was. According to the lawyer, the courts are still trying to observe the right to defense. And yet, when the lawyer returned to the court after providing assistance to people in the Nagorny police department, the meeting was already about three hours and was nearing completion. Shkred went into the hall at 21:40. By that time, his client managed to file a number of petitions. In particular, he asked to give him the opportunity to get acquainted with the materials of the investigator’s petition, but the court refused him this. Having joined the process, the lawyer requested the transfer of the court session due to the fact that night time had already occurred. The court refused. The lawyer managed to achieve a break to communicate with the client, and after the break, he filed a petition to familiarize himself with the materials of the investigator’s petition along with Konstantinov. This judge Ermishin granted the defense and announced a break until May 12. The meeting at which the investigator of Smirnov will be considered to restrict Konstantinov in the terms of familiarization with the case should begin at 14:00. “I hope that we will still be able to convince the court that the investigation abuses the right of restriction,” Shkred says. The lawyer noted that the judicial practice to limit the terms of familiarization with the case in the last year is not in favor of protection. Unless the court may give a few more periods than the investigator asks. The lawyer is convinced that the weeks to familiarize himself with the case of his client or lawyers will not be enough - not to mention the fact that this week was incomplete. Investigator Smirnov submitted a document in court, which states that on May 9–11 the investigative isolator would provide Konstantinov with the opportunity to get acquainted with the materials of the criminal case. Indeed, as it became known to Shkred, on May 9 and 10, his client was given such an opportunity. He did not know about the 11th at the time of the conversation with the ATD-Info correspondent, because he visited Konstantinov in the pre-trial detention center of the 10th. However, lawyers are not required to work on holidays and weekends, and the rest of the lawyers and working days could not get acquainted with the new volumes of the case. (Do not forget that changes are possible in old volumes.) At a meeting on May 8, Shkred was faced not only with bias in consideration of the petition, but also with unprecedented pressure from the court. “When I entered the hall, there were six employees of the bailiff service. What was the need for their presence with a small number of people (judge, secretary, prosecutor, investigator, accused and lawyer) and, with a closed court, I could not understand. Usually, even when the audience was present, there were much fewer bailiffs near Daniel. One of the bailiffs made comments to me and Daniel: for example, he did not like the intonation with which I stated the petition, or that I began to leaf through the papers at the moment when the judge explores the written materials of the case. This is the first time I faced this. I can regard this court hearing as a kind of procedural pressure: everything is done so that a person cannot fully protect his rights and take advantage of his procedural status and proper protection. It will not be difficult for none of the lawyers to calculate that if I am given material for familiarization an hour before considering the petition, I still will not study it well and preparation on it will still be weak. In order to correctly protect on any procedural issue, you need at least a day to think about everything. Lawyers do not have the right to think. The court does not see the need for this-the decision is already made, why else think about something to the lawyer? ”By the way, when the investigation first transferred Konstantinov’s case to the prosecutor’s office, this was done before the accused and the defense ended the acquaintance with the case: a false protocol was drawn up that the defense was refused further familiarization.
