The trial of the director of the orphanage in Komi is a story about how the interests of minors can be used for personal purposes

In the city of Usinsk, in Komi, there is "orphanage No. 4 for orphans and children left without parental care." It is considered one of the best not only in the republic, but throughout Russia. As an experimental site, he was one of the first to switch to a new system - the life of pupils is now organized by family type: children live in rooms that are no different from home apartments, and their teacher has been assigned to each “family” (out of eight children), as well as a social sponsor responsible for leisure, gifts, internships and further employment.

Victories in the All -Union contests, letters, awards as an exemplary children's boarding school - all this will cross out a criminal case, instituted in the fall of 2015 against the director of Svetlana Lunga.

Profile of the case Svetlana Lunga
Court: Usinsky City Court.

The accused: Svetlana Lunga, director of the orphanage.

Article: Art. 286, part 3, paragraph “a” - “exceeding official authority with the use of violence or with the threat of its use”.

Stage: Interrogation of witnesses.

Threats: up to 10 years.

A few months earlier, 11 pupils (from 12 to 16 years) will write statements by adult legal terms to the guardianship authorities with a request to “take immediate measures”. It will be about humiliations, insults and assault by the director. Incidents, according to children, allegedly took place with each individually in 2012, 2013 and 2014. But they decided to report only now.

The institution came to the institution with inspections: guardianship, prosecutor’s office, Ministry of Education, an apparatus of a local Commissioner for the Rights of the Child, psychologists. During the conversations, the children behaved suspiciously: and it seems to confirm what was written, and it seems like "it was not quite so."

What will seem strange to all the inspectors (with the exception of guardianship): until June 2015, the authorized man’s apparatus, but none of the pupils, were regularly visited in an orphanage in a planned manner, although they had the opportunity - adults communicated alone with children.

"Children were promised to arrange in good families"

The Department of Organization and Coordination of Activities on Guardianship and Board of the Ministry of Socialistry created a special commission on this occasion, the official investigation established: there were actually no cases described in appeals. And the working group of the Public Chamber of the Republic with the participation of the Minister of Education Komi Sharkov found out: the complaints were initiated only by some pupils who knocked out and others to follow their example.

The sister of one of these pupils is an employee of the same guardianship Elena S., who, according to our information, helped all the guys draw up statements. Her brother, as the children told, personally advised them to do this. The boy himself at the investigation, however, explained: he did not advise, but only wondered if they wrote.

All complaints, the minister noted, were written as a carbon copy, and it is painfully complex and the same type of formulations. “Children were prepared. In their statements not by age, competent legal slang, ”noted independent psychologists who had more questions to the guardianship authorities than to the director. And the employees of the apparatus of the Commissioner eventually learned from the children themselves: they who wrote the statement - the guardianship was promised to arrange in good families. And if it really was so, then more meanness cannot be invented - to blackmail orphans with the opportunity to find your home and foster parents.

During confidential conversations, five out of 11 children immediately abandoned their appeals. One girl, seeing her own statement, was surprised and said that the handwriting was not her. Subsequently, two more distressed from the statements. Three - including the brother of the guardian of the guardianship authority - insist on charges.

“The actions of guardianship and trusteeship bodies suggest that children are used by adults to solve some of their interests directed against the director of the institution,” the members of the Public Chamber noted, saying the intention to ask the head of the Komi to intervene in the situation and provide the house with the opportunity to calmly prepare for the new academic year, stop “koshmat” children and the team.

... But calm did not work. The head of the Republic of Gaiser and a number of high-ranking officials in September 2015, as you know, were arrested. And a month later, the SK charged Lung (this is that the prosecutor's office made refusals to initiate criminal cases). A very brief and laconic indictment is a set of the same type of retelling of the explanations of pupils and employees of the guardianship authorities.

After the Gaiser’s arrest to defend Lung, none of the officials will get up, as will “not“ not notice ”the situation“ United Russia ”, from which she decided to become Lunga shortly before the story of complaints. Only Lukoil and North Oil - the long -standing social partners of the orphanage - wrote and write open appeals to the UK and the court.

House

Lung is now under the subscription. He denies guilt, but refuses to talk to me. The staff of the orphanage also evades conversations, as if intimidated. But it is important - none of the workers against Lunga gave any testimony. Those who know the directors personally, on conditions of anonymity, say that Lunga worked at school, then in the guardianship authorities, and in 2007 she was invited to the post of director of the orphanage No. 4. There, she recalls eyewitnesses, found the following picture: 21 of 54 children were registered in preventive institutions for drinking alcohol, vagrancy, universal departures, thefts, drug addiction, and toxication, toxication, toxication. etc. “Nobody is registering nine years later,” my interlocutors say, noting that over the years, Lunga found sponsors - Lukoil and Northern Oil, which help to this day.

The house began to arrange holidays more often, go on excursions, go to theaters, go on vacation at sea. The performance pulled up. With those who lagged behind, they were engaged in addition. If before Lunga the percentage of admission to the institutes was zero and many with difficulty ending the nine -year -old, now they are studying in good universities. “Lung has created the conditions for the children to be so busy that they would not have time to think about Kurev and party,” they say, who know her. The Republican Government, if you raise local media, also appreciated the efforts of Lung. At meetings, she was recognized as the best director. Moscow even offered to participate in the All -Russian competition of the best children's institutions. As a result, the Owsk house got into the "Golden Fund of Human Personnel".

For the first time, guardianship authorities came to Lung with a check the day before the anniversary of the orphanage. They began to interview children. And after a couple of days, the same unfortunate 11 statements from the children about hard circulation, insults, and even the illegal committing of abortion appeared in Lunga.

Regarding the “abortion”: the case file has the testimony of the obstetrician-gynecologist Yakhontova O.G., who examined Alice F. and established the fact of pregnancy-14 weeks. According to the doctor, the girl was put on preservation, but she had a miscarriage. Alice’s abortion measures, the doctor emphasized, was not used. In order for Lung, who took the girl to the hospital, beat her, the doctor did not see her, she didn’t hear screams, she only remembers that, having learned about the pregnancy of the pupil, the director was upset.

“She was really upset,” says one of the acquaintances Lung. -It was about the 15-year-old pupil ... Who would not be upset? But she did not reproach Alice. And when the older sister took her under guardianship in June 2015, then complaints went.

In her statement of guardianship, Alice, among other things, wrote that the director systematically defeated her. True, there is no forensic medical examination in the case. Fixed beatings too. There is only a witness to Irina P. - Alice's older sister, who refers in the testimony of the younger stories. When asked why Alice turned to the guardianship authorities only in 2015, and not in 2011 or in 2012 and 2013, when Alice, according to her, was also beaten, Irina replied that she was simply “afraid” to admit.

Irina's husband Sergey P. - Lawyer. A number of children, who later abandoned their statements, will say that it was they who offered them assistance in drawing up applications and personally brought them to their car to the guardianship authorities.

I talked with 17-year-old Alice on the phone. She invited her to express her point of view and transfer my phone to her sister Irina. The girl said that she would give it and what they would think. Not called back.

For what

Those who support Lunga - both acquaintances and simply locals - suggested that local guardianship and member of the Government of Komi Tamara Nikolaev can be related to its persecution. In 2007, when Lunga headed the house, Nikolaev, being deputy head of the administration for social issues, decided to create a separate shelter for children who fell into difficult life situations right in the orphanage. What looked strange: the orphanage and so accepted not only orphans, but also children who fell into difficult life situations, which were abused, refugees. That is, it was pointless to build something separately. “But Nikolaev began to measure all the premises in the house, demanded from the director the sea of ​​documents. Lunga explained to her that the premises in the house according to sanitary standards were not enough (this is the former kindergarten). Lunga as best she could defend and so small room, said that it was impossible to take away from the children what is. ”

By the way, - and this is official information - three years before the story with the shelter, in 2004, Nikolaev received a criminal record for fraud with budget money, however, with three officials, she had taken off a fine.

The fined official threatened the director of the prosecutor's office. And Lungu informed the ambitious plans of the official of the Ministry of Education and also turned for help to Northern Oil and Lukoil, who reached the then head of the Republic of Gaiser. Nikolaeva lagged behind Lung. But, probably, he hid the insult.

When Nikolaev goes to work in the Gaiser administration, the guardianship authorities, by a strange coincidence, will now and then try to initiate criminal cases against Lung for the fact that she does not give children to families.

“It was important for Svetlana to give the child once and for all in good hands and not to allow secondary and trinity orphans, when the child is handed over back and then,” says her friend. - And guardians have a formal approach to the adoptive parents. For Lung, it is important not only the material situation of the family that can take a child, but how the child reacts to this family. There was a case in 2014, when she, seeing that the child was not in contact, invited the woman to extend the period of communication, and not take it right away. But the adoptive parent, on the advice of guardianship, wrote to Svetlana a complaint "for the forcible retention of a child." The prosecutor’s office refused her. The woman eventually took the child after some time, but soon returned back. Bottom line: only children suffer from this in all ... "

At some point, Lung, unable to stand it, created a school in an orphanage to study candidates for adoptive parents. Until today, not a single candidate for custody training has been sent to the orphanage.

The secretaries of Tamara Nikolaeva, when I said that I wanted to talk about Lung, told me that she had a tight work schedule. Officer of the guardianship Elena S., sister of one of the pupils, refuted everything told to me by those who support Lung. However, to clarify a number of contradictions - why the children made complaints after 2-3 years - could not. “This is the tactics of lawyers Lung - such allegations about the“ pressure ”for the guys. No one forced the children to write complaints. They came to us alone and were afraid that they would learn about it in an orphanage. ”

Court

For the prosecutor's office, the conclusions of psychologists that the children wrote complaints under the dictation - an empty phrase. As well as the doctor’s testimony about the fact that Abortion Alice F. was not done. The court, which, really wants to hope, will figure it out in everything, began over Lung in February 2016. It is closed due to the victims-three minors. Witnesses of the prosecution are guardianship officers.

Parents in this story, for obvious reasons, are not heard. Most pupils have only distant relatives or sisters and brothers. Unless at the trial was the father of the victim of Daria V. his written testimonies at the investigation of only two paragraphs - according to his daughter, Lung “beat her, dragged her by the hair,” but he does not know what caused the actions of the director. In court, when the prosecutor read out these testimonies, the father said that he did not talk about “beat” and “dragged by the hair”.

- And where is it from? - the prosecutor was amazed, pointing to written indications. - He ( investigator . - V. Ch. ) Gave you a protocol to read?

- Yes, he gave. And I did not read, just signed and left. I thought he wrote normally, especially since I was without glasses, I did not see ...

Judge : Witness, please do not express yourself.

Prosecutor : She didn’t tell you that your daughter was beaten?

- No. She says there was a bad relationship. And all.

Lawyer Knyazev A.N.: But the rhetorical question: what, there are children beat there?

The response of the witness: no, she didn’t say this.

What now

The pupils of the orphanage, with the exception of those three children, created a page dedicated to the detached director in VKontakte. They upload photos there, tell her that they have new ones, as they finish quarters, and often write: "We miss very well."

When Lung was removed, the children tried to call the president during a direct line, but could not. They also wrote in her defense in the UK and the court. But in the orphanage, the investigators were banned from the post of Lung, warning: if they find out that she came there, there would be an arrest right away. As a result, she faces 3 to 10 years in prison.

In addition, Lung has a lawsuit in the amount of 700 thousand rubles for moral damage to the “victims”. While none of the witnesses of the prosecution, with the exception of the relatives of Alice F., did not confirm the fact of abuse of children on her part.

What is this: revenge, envy of other people's success, others - selfish - motives? Not so important in principle. Symptomatically different - it became customary to protect children only on formal grounds, spitting on them themselves, and sometimes using in personal or official (not important) purposes.