The office writes, the office rules

In 46 of 48 phonograms that served as evidence of the guilt of the defendants in the case of the “network”*, the editing signs were revealed

A student of Penza University Ilya Shakursky was detained on October 18, 2017. The same number is dated to the disc with the records of “Telephone and other negotiations of Saskursky I.A. and his connections. " Their text version (decryption) was made by 10/25/2017 and signed by the operative Vyacheslav Shepelev ( Shakursky and Pchelintsev announced to torture with his participation ). There are no documents in the case on how this decoding was carried out, whether a technical specialist participated in the opening of phonograms.

It is noteworthy that Vlad Vlavolsky is indicated as the interlocutor of Shakursky as an interlocutor of Shakhsky.

The neo -Nazi, under this name, is known in the activist environment of Penza, in the case file, he will become a secret witness to Kabanov.

Despite the fact that even before the start of the process, he will be revealed, identifying as a student of PSU Vlada Gresko, in court he will testify from a secret room that prophesies with a voice changed by special equipment. Kabanov does not admit that he has been introduced into the anti -fascist environment on the instructions of the FSB.

Shakursky himself showed that Dobrovolsky contacted him through a social network. Ilya made contact and maintained communication, hoping to replay Vlad in order to find out more about the plans of Nazi groups. “Dobrovolsky” fueled interest, draining information about the preparatory attacks on the anti -fascists. Conversations became more dangerous:

Vlad campaigned for the transition to decisive action against the “rotten system”, but when he started talking about how to make a bomb, Shakursky cut off communication and stopped answering his calls.

Shaursky, he said, also made a record of conversations with Dobrovolsky on his smartphone. On it, he kept a photo of one of the meetings with him, secretly taken at his request by his friend Masha Yakupova (she has already confirmed this in court).

The smartphone will be seized with Ilya when detained. But, having familiarized himself with the case file, he did not find any mention of his mobile phone and filed an application for the loss to the investigator. About a week will pass, Shatkursky recalls, before the evening of January 25, 2019, investigator Tokarev will return his smartphone to him, explaining that the device was all the time with the operatives. Turning on the phone, Ilya found that it was completely formatted. And there is already nothing in it - neither a record of conversations with Dobrovolsky, nor a photo of their meeting, nor a set of challenges unacceptable from him (which could confirm the words of Ilya about a one -sided termination of communication).

Now at the hearing on September 16, his lawyer Sergei Morgunov presented a certificate from the service center:

It follows from it that the Shakursky smartphone was formatted and the data from the memory card was deleted on 01/25/2019 at 13.33. That is, a few hours before returning to the owner.

Shakursky and his defender were announced about these seizures after familiarizing themselves with the results of the examination of phonograms performed by FSB specialists Maria Komleva (linguistic analysis) and Alexei Leontyev (technical research) last fall. Their conclusion states: "There are no signs of installation."

The side of defense presented in court a conclusion made after her appeal to the St. Petersburg ANO “Forensic Laboratory of Audiovisual Documents”. The results were presented at the hearing German Zubov, a specialist in the field of judicial phraseoscopy with 26 years of experience, who previously worked in the expert-forensic units of the internal affairs bodies.

Zubov will explain that when performing a study, he used the methods and software approved by the scientific and methodological council of the Ministry of Justice of Russia for use in subordinate judicial expert institutions, and followed by the FSB of Russia approved by the organization of the production of shippertizations in expert divisions of state security agencies. The subject of his analysis was the conclusion of the examination (ZE) Komlevoy -Leontiev and the files with phonograms they studied.

To begin with, to teeth, he noticed that neither in the case file, nor in ZE there is no information about the conditions and circumstances of the recording of phonograms, as well as the equipment and software used during the recording.

In the introductory part of the ZE, it is said that a disk is presented on which 48 audio data files were found. The phonograms contained in them, the expert Leontiev denotes as SF (spoken phonograms), assigning them their numbering, different from the resulting during examination. At the same time, in the research part of the ZE, he indicates: “The objects of the study are presented in the form of a“ 219.ra ”format file-archive. More this archive file in this section is not mentioned. Its origin remains a mystery.

“This, along with information about the non -compliance of the numbering of phonograms, gives reason to believe that the expert conducted the study of sound files obtained from another source,” concludes the dental withdrawal.

“It seems that the expert linguist received some files for research, and the technical expert-others.”

According to the results of linguistic analysis, the expert Komlev admits that the records “do not contain statements about participation in the terrorist community and the performance of leading and coordinating functions”. But there are talk "On the preparation of the coming revolution in Russia, the creation and seizure of an autonomous region."

Meanwhile, tooths are questioned by the suitability of the submitted records for the study - in any case, the FSB experts did not give this comprehensive assessment. They claim that they were guided by the Dialect methodology. But it resembles a St. Petersburg specialist, contains clear criteria for assessing suitability (in particular, the signal/noise ratio, but there are no reliable data in the ZE).

In addition, a phonetic analysis of the votes compared without taking into account regional and/or dialect signs, draws the attention of teeth and concludes: “Thus, the expert’s conclusion about the suitability and unsuitability of phonograms for identification is unreasonable, and the study in this part does not correspond to the“ dialect ”methodology.

The audit of St. Petersburg experts showed that Leontyev in his part of the work does not follow the methods that referred to.

“When separating primary phonograms, fragments were removed or not preserved from them, the duration and content of which is not possible to establish,” the report of the Zubov team said. Leontiev’s conclusions are evaluated as scientifically unfounded.

The vast majority of phonograms (46 out of 48) are not original. And their originality is one of the signs of installation, modification.

“If you analyze the characteristics of files with phonograms, it is clear that many were recorded“ overlap, ”the specialist showed at the hearing. - This contradicts the conclusions of the expert [Leontiev] about identification: one person could not at the same time participate in two conversations. Accordingly, all these files were created not during the recording, but after.

The state prosecutor tried to reduce the analysis of St. Petersburg experts to their personal "conclusions":

- So you think that there are signs of installation, and they believe that not.

“I do not just think that I have proven it, but they don’t,” retorts Zubov.

- That is, the expert [Leontyev] did not use the methods that was supposed to use?

- No.

- Completely, in general, or what?

- I would say, I used five percent.

The term for which the FSB experts managed with their conclusion (40 calendar days) seems unrealistic to Zubov: if they actually followed the methods that they refer to, it would take twice as much time.

“The case is very complicated, in my practice I have not met such phonograms,” the specialist admitted. - A lot of very unusual characteristics that experts are not reflected in any way. Where do new components come from all the time?

It’s as if they twist the pen: if someone else found tape tape recorders, there they turned the “level of recording” with such a pen, he constantly swims here.

It is only possible to say that the studied phonograms are not authentic in any way, because the replicas are not consistent at the joints, part of the information is lost. What - we do not know. The results of our assessment, in contrast to the conclusion of the FSB experts, meet the criteria of scientificity - are easily checked and repeated.

The court granted the defense of the defense to introduce the conclusion of St. Petersburg experts to the case file and the call to the court for the interrogation of experts of the FSB Komleva and Leontiev.

*The organization "Network" is recognized as terrorist and prohibited in the Russian Federation.