"The task of the performance is to show women who may fall under court"

In the process in the case of Zhenya Berkovich and Svetlana Petriychuk, actresses played who played Maryushki - Russians who were recruited in ISIS

In Moscow, in the second Western District Military Court, the process continues in the case of director Zhenya Berkovich and playwright Svetlana Petriychuk, who are accused of "justification and promotion of terrorism." The reason for their persecution was the play “Finist Yasny Sokol”, staged by Berkovich based on the play by Petriychuk and received the Golden Mask, he talks about the Russians who decided to leave for Syria to marry the Islamists. Correspondents of the publication "Coast" went to the second meeting in this case. "Medusa" publishes the report "Coast" entirely.

“There is no delivery yet. We are waiting, ”the lawyers of Zhenya Berkovich addresses the lawyers of the judge and rushes further along the corridor. By “delivery”, he has in mind the accused, who at that time are taken to court from the pre -trial detention center.

The meeting begins with a two -hour delay. Judge Yuri Massin explains that the “road situation” was the reason for the delay - but does not give details.

On the first day of the process, the parties managed to interrogate only two witnesses (despite the fact that the meeting lasted almost 11 hours). For today, another seven are planned. The first in the hall is the actress Julia Vitkovskaya (she is better known to the audience under the pseudonym for Skirin). The prosecutor Ekaterina Denisova immediately apologizes to her for the fact that on the eve of Vitkovskaya it was necessary to sit in court for more than 10 hours - and then the testimony was transferred to the next meeting.

The prosecutor asks the actress about working on the performance; In the “finalist” she played one of the Maryushki - the heroines, who are recruited by the radicals from the “Islamic state”. Vitkovskaya says that at some point Berkovich decided to add monologues to the performance, which the actresses themselves were supposed to write. The director of the director Ksenia Karpinskaya offers to reproduce the monologue, the witness asks the judge to read the text from the phone. He agrees, but asks him to show him the phone so that in the protocol it can be indicated that Vitkovskaya "uses an electronic communication device." Lawyers look at each other and chuckle silently.

- iPhone, yes?

- Yes.

- Which?

- The thirteenth.

“I will not watch any personal data,” the judge justifies. - I bring it to the attention of the participants in the process: the text [monologue] is displayed on the screen of the mobile device. The first word of the text "Julia", the latter is "Harvesting".

Vitkovskaya reads a monologue. In it, Maryushka tells how she went to Syria to her future husband, whom she met on the Internet, but, having arrived, found out that that terrorist. In Syria, she was forced to wear a shahida belt, as a result, she decided to escape - and having returned to Russia, she received a deadline and now she could not find a job.

Berkovich Berkovich Elena Oreshnikova asks if the actress heard negative reviews for the performance. She in response tells how, after one of the shows, the spectator came up to her and said that her mother was trying to recruit Islamists - almost as described in the “finist”. “Thank you for talking about this. I would like my mother to see the performance. Maybe this will somehow affect her choice, ”the witness of her words retells.

- Please tell me in the team of “Soso’s daughters” ( Berkovich’s theater project, his employees put “Finist”, approx. Medusa )? - The director herself is connected to the interrogation.

- Yes, the chief administrator and director.

-It seems to you that they are somehow discriminated in the process of work?

- Of course not.

- I apologize, but what does these questions have to do with the case? - Judge Massin interferes.

“Your honor is one of the points in my indictment - that I am a reflect of a certain“ radical feminism ”.

“Maybe then ask about it?”

“Well, a concrete question,” Berkovich agrees and addresses the witness again, “is it known to you that I am“ adherent to radical feminism ”?”

- No.

-Does you say anything to the wording of the Androcentric Latablast in Russia?

“To my shame, I have never heard her.”

- Have you heard of me?

- No.

The judge announces an hourly break so that the defendants can have lunch and “does not turn out as before” (on the eve of Berkovich and Petriychuk, with their words , only “they ate very hastily” during one of the breaks).

The next witness is actress Anastasia Sapozhnikova. She is also friends with Berkovich, and in the play “Finist Yasny Falcon” played a judge who sentenced one of Maryushki. The prosecutor asks if he remembers Sapozhnikov what punishment the heroine received. “I, in my opinion, gave Maryushka seven years,” the actress replies.

Lawyer Sergei Badamshin (he defends Svetlana Petriychuk) smiles, throws his head and rolls his eyes, as if remembering something. The fact is that the prototype of one of the heroines of the “Finist” was Varvara Karaulov - and Badamshin also defended it. Eight years ago, Karaulov was found guilty of an attempt to join terrorists and sentenced to four and a half years in the colony. The meetings in the case of Karaulova were held precisely in the Second Western District Military Court.

- What does this performance say about girls who cross the border of the Russian Federation in order to get into the prohibited grouping of ISIS? Does this act justify, promotes? - the prosecutor is interested.

The witness looks at Denisov for several seconds with a perplexed look and explains that Maryushki is not going to Syria not in order to join the Islamic state, but to "get married, create a family and give birth to children."

- Well, there it is also said in open text that they are leaving for them [terrorists]! - the prosecutor is trying to argue. - “To them” is a collective image or one man?

- I object! There [the play] doesn’t say so directly, this is a free interpretation of the prosecutor, ”Ksenia Karpinskaya connects to the conversation. -You either quote, or ask a question differently.

The judge defends the prosecutor and reproaches the lawyer that she allegedly also does not always ask correct questions. Karpinskaya in response recalls: at the last meeting, lawyers suggested watching the record of the performance, but the prosecutor and the judge refused and decided to figure out everything according to the written description of the scenes. And now mistakenly quote the text of the play. Judge Yuri Massin ignores this remark.

- There was no that they were leaving and entering ISIS [at their own way]! - says Sapozhnikova. - This was not at all. On the contrary, they did not even know what their lover was doing. They wanted to love, lead the household, and not [join] ISIS. Well, who wants to go to ISIS?

Badamshin raises an eyebrow on these words.

-Do you know something that Evgenia Borisovna is a “radical feminist”? - asks the witness Karpinskaya.

- And what is it? - the witness asks perplexedly. - We are like all a little feminists, but what is radical ...

Badamshin, in turn, asks, the judge that the actress played in the “finalist” was a positive or negative character. “Of course, there were moments where I played the Last Judgment - well, because the court is really scary! - the actress answers and turns to the judge. “But I can’t say that I played a negative character.” This was not. "

Following Margarita Tolstoganova. In the “finalist” she played a journalist who decided to implement the Islamists to write “significant material” and thanks to this to find a “good job”.

Tolstoganova says that she herself is an Orthodox Christian, and Berkovich considers a “funny atheist” (at the first meeting, the director of the “Soso’s daughters” Alexander Andriyevich gave a similar characteristic - he called the director a “cheerful atheist”).

- Here you say that she is a cheerful atheist ... - Karpinskaya begins

- Yes, I have a story! - interrupts Tolstoganova.

- Wait.

- Good!

- She [Berkovich] shared extremely aggressive forms of Islam? - continues Karpinskaya.

- No.

Karpinskaya is silent, Tolstoganova tells her story. According to her, once Berkovich asked her to go to the temple together, but the actress could not - but in the end the director did not become a Christian. Immediately, the witness adds that even her confessor approved participation in the “finalist”, who called the performance “good history”.

The following actress is invited to the hall - Natalia Sapozhnikov (she played one of Maryushki; with Anastasia Sapozhnikova, who played the judge, they are namesake). She talks about the performance and religious views of Berkovich about the same as the rest. Each next interrogation is shorter than the previous one.

“[The task of the performance] is to show gullible women who, in an aspiration for a male ideal, can fall under trial and do something bad. Message is how not to get caught [to the persuasion of recruiters] and protect themselves and other women from this, ”the witness explains.

- Do you consider the choice of your characters right? - Badamshin is interested.

- In no case do I approve.

“There were comments from the audience, criticism?”

- No. Everyone understood the meaning of the performance, there were only positive reviews. Only empathy. I hope you understood me correctly.

- I understand, but the witness gives evidence to the court.

“The word“ empathy ”is well -known,” the judge intervenes.

“Your honor, I really hope for this,” Badamshin is malicious.

By the seventh hour of the meeting, all participants in the process are noticeably tired. The last of the witnesses (two more came to court) Svetlana Speranskaya is performing - but the actress does not add anything new to what has already been said.

Everyone says the same thing: neither Berkovich nor Petriychuk “radical Islamism” (as “radical feminism”) did not profess, they did not “justify” terrorism and did not “propagate”.

"Shore"