The Tverskoy District Court of Moscow extended until August 10 a ban on certain actions against supporters of the "indefinite protest" Olga Misik, Ivan Vorobyevsky and Igor Basharimov. This was reported by a lawyer from OVD-Info Dmitry Zakhvatov.
On March 31, the court overturned the decision to extend the ban on certain actions for activists at the request of the prosecutor's office. “[The decision to cancel] is formally connected with the fact that the world court, when making the decision, did not take into account the personality of the defendant Olga Misik,” explains Zakhvatov. What is meant, the lawyer could not clarify: “I don’t know what kind of undercover decisions there are. For what I bought - for that I sold.
The meeting also considered the submission of the Federal Penitentiary Service to tighten the preventive measure for Igor Basharimov. According to the document, the defendant does not comply with the ban assigned to him, namely, does not appear at home in Arkhangelsk, at the place of registration.
As Elena Sheremetyeva, a lawyer from OVD-Info, said, the position of the defense was initially that such a measure was impossible: the train from Moscow to Arkhangelsk takes 23 hours, and her client must regularly attend meetings. The court rejected the submission of the Federal Penitentiary Service, but, extending the preventive measure, retained all the established prohibitions.
Also at the meeting, a witness who participated in the identification of Ivan Vorobyevsky was questioned on the merits. “This young man is an employee of the Shokoladnitsa cafe, and he saw how Ivan Vorobyevsky was in a cafe not far from the scene on the night of the events. During the interrogation, the witness explained that some of the signatures in the protocol of his interrogation as a witness were not his,” lawyer Zakhvatov said.
At the same time, according to the lawyer, the witness who participated in the identification of Vorobyevsky is the witness’s girlfriend: “It turns out that the person who carried out the identification is affiliated with the witness.” According to the defender, "this protocol cannot be considered admissible evidence."
At the beginning of March, lawyers from OVD-Info defending the defendants in the case of the “booth of federal importance” discovered that the prosecution had falsified evidence.