Translated material
"Usmanov-Chellendge"
In order to get a stereoscopic picture of what is happening on with the cost of the claim of Alisher Usmanov against Alexei Navalny, you can read two twitter - press secretary of Navalny Kira Yar and KP correspondent Alexander Rogoza. The first looks at the process through the eyes of the FBK, the second - from the point of view of the protection of the oligarch. It is worth noting that representatives of the parties did not object to video broadcast (a rare case of unanimity), but the court refused it.
Usmanov did one good thing. Thanks to him, I will see Pic.twitter.com/xrimkrq37f during the legendary Padva.
- Alexey Navalny (@navalny) May 30, 2017
The famous lawyer Henry Padva represents the interests of Usmanov in court. Joint photography of the idyll and ended.
Usmanov’s lawyer Heinrich Padva: "All statements in the publication of the FBK are arbitrary, they are not based on anything"
- Alexander Rogoza (@rogozavr) May 30, 2017
Lawyer Usmanova: "We do not dispute that there was a contract of donation of the site in the Odintsovo district between the Usmanov and the charity fund"
- Alexander Rogoza (@rogozavr) May 30, 2017
Lawyer Usmanova: "But the documents presented by the defendant do not indicate that Dmitry Medvedev has something to do with this"
- Alexander Rogoza (@rogozavr) May 30, 2017
Lawyer Henry Padva: Alexey Anatolyevich said - we want to see, we want to see. But they must provide evidence!
- Alexander Rogoza (@rogozavr) May 30, 2017
The same moment in the presentation of Yarmys:
The court is not a place to get acquainted with such documents, ”says Padva. We have these documents, but we will not show them
- Kira Yarmys (@kira_yarmysh) May 30, 2017
Padva: It was necessary to get acquainted with these documents, when you have been investigating our plaintiff!
- Kira Yarmys (@kira_yarmysh) May 30, 2017
In general, the court refused not only the calling the witnesses of Medvedev and Shuvalov, but also to introduce the document from Rosreestr - the very one, about the gift of the site, which Navalny calls the "bribe" of Usmanova Medvedev.
We ask you to demand from Rosreestr a donation agreement Pic.twitter.com/clsny8uxh0
- Georgy Alburov (@alburov) May 30, 2017
This Navalny especially outraged.
- Navalny, I'm ready to answer all the questions. In court we will see everything and figure it out! - the court refuses to broadcast, witnesses and documents
- Alexey Navalny (@navalny) May 30, 2017
As evidence, the court will only introduce Usmanov’s videos, which the court of some pieces of paper from which Rosreestr
- vladislav (@unkn0wnerror) May 30, 2017
As a result, the judge "at this stage" refused all the claims of the FBK to call witnesses.
Henry Padva: These petitions are untimely. By law, the defendants are obliged to indicate what circumstances connect the "witnesses" with our claim
- Alexander Rogoza (@rogozavr) May 30, 2017
By the way about the videos: the third message of Usmanov has not yet been followed, instead, the oligarch decided to play on someone else's field and declare ... memes of memes:
Friends!
It is very flattered that my video messages attracted such great attention. I am sincerely interested in the development of free communication and creativity on the network. I am sure that this work, even being sharp and unpleasant, should not turn into a frank lie. With this, according to most thinking people. I really appreciate jokes and humor and glad that I caused my video the appearance of stickers, caricatures, parodies, videos and memes.
Examples of creativity on the topic of my video features and in their development, I will be happy to post on my page on the social network VKontakte and once a week I will be awarded the author of the most successful, to my subjective taste, creation of the same device that I shot my first video - iPhone 7Plus and a T -shirt with a meme and my autograph)) <...>
For the competition, we opened a specially created page on the social network VKontakte https://vk.com/usmanov_Challenge.
There is nothing on the Usmanov -Challenga page except for the above record of Usmanov and the video with Professor Preobrazhensky ("Alexey Poligraphovich", we do not forget), but 6 thousand people have already subscribed to it - in anticipation of iPhones, probably.
And Navalny, meanwhile, kept his promise and the day before the trial answered Usmanov - both in video format and in the traditional text (many documents, which you need to deal with thoughtfully). The main points of Navalny - 1) is still unclear how Usmanov earned his initial capital, 2) the privatization in which he participated, raises questions, 3) Usmanov, perhaps left the taxes in the Russian Federation, 4) Usmanov’s accusations of “rape” are based on the words of the former British ambassador in Uzbekistan Murrey, there is no evidence that Navalny has no evidence that Usmanov was judged precisely for this, but he more believes in the British ambassador.
The last situation is disassembled by Medusa , and from its analysis it follows that Navalny here, in general, is somewhat cunning.
Craig Murray refers to “Widespread Belief) and asks readers of details. So to say that he “insists on the reliability” of this information and give a link to such a blog entry is strange.
And Alexander Plyushchev draws attention to this:
While Usmanov went to flirt with the membrane and suck them with iPhones, Navalny became even more serious and answered strictly, in places even boring documented. The central place there is raw material enrichment and transfer pricing - tax evasion from the export of raw materials using offshore processing companies. Navalny mentions that Khodorkovsky was put for 10 years for this. Here is a fork: either we believe that Khodorkovsky was condemned unfairly, but then the claims of Usmanov should be negligible from our point of view. Either Usmanov (and not only he) should sit in prison, but Khodorkovsky is not a prisoner of conscience at all.
The press service of Usmanova called the response of Navalny "Speech in the Stand Up Comedy genre and threatened with new lawsuits, RNS reports .
It is a pity that he has been less in demand lately, and his investigations resemble the scenarios of the middle hand of the humorous show. Representatives of the legal service are especially grateful for Navalny for the opportunity to work a lot and fruitfully on the preparation of new claims.
Navalny himself, it seems, is not very glad that he was so “bogged down” in a dispute with Usmanov, but he sees benefits in the current situation.
Although this whole dialogue with Usmanov takes us away from the main villains - Medvedev and Putin - but still he is useful.
The raw materials oligarchs got it. These are harmful people. They do not bring any benefits at all. They did not build anything, did not invent and did not . <...>
Yes, I am against Putin, he is the main villain.
But it is no less important to say "yes, I am against Usmanov." The oligarchs are the support of the regime and one of the causes of poverty.
An interesting analysis of the situation around Usmanov and Navalny can be found on the website "AP" - "Anonymous Political Sciences". The authors of the report believe that Usmanova asked Medvedev personally to “join the game” to take a blow from himself.
Medvedev personally cannot respond to criticism, this will not only raise Navalny and confirm his claims to the status of a presidential candidate, but also belittle the prime minister himself to the level of the opposition blogger. At the same time, the scandal reached the level that it is also impossible to leave criticism unanswered, since this causes Medvedev’s rating constant damage.
Therefore, the strategy was chosen, the main tasks of which were:
- Shift the focus of public attention from Medvedev to another object. The best candidate was Usmanov, an entrepreneur who, unlike a public politician, is much less concerned about his own rating.
- Change the essence of the conflict. Usmanov’s emotional reaction, his resentment to Navalny, who extended knowingly false information about Usmanov’s conviction for rape, looks absolutely believable. The public response to such an accusation is quite logical.
At the same time, in the course of the case, Usmanov "carried away" and, apparently, now acts not only as a proxy Medvedev.
The court, meanwhile, continues.