FROM THE FIRST PERSON. PART OF THE NEXT. NOT THE LAST
"On the court with me, the Moskovets and Medvedev. Today I'll be brief.
17 June held a meeting, which was additionally questioned Arkhipova - head of legal Department Tominsk GOK. The need arose as it is, in fact, lied in the preliminary investigation and in court. As I said, in the debate I will require the court to evaluate her testimony and bringing her to justice for giving false testimony according to article 307 of the criminal code, as its chief Ulanovskaya in accordance with article 306 of the criminal code of Russian Federation "Obviously false denunciation". For example, it provided help on the damage, which indicated that could be affected forestry equipment worth 32 million rubles, which there in sight the scene was not. And the premises set on fire wood a construction site in 2017 was not, as she claimed. But it makes all the difference if it is a vacant lot, and the disorderly to impute not. Next, the whole interrogation, she Dodge, as is customary among employees of RMK, probably all together they attend special corporate courses and lectures about the art of duplicity, innuendo and hypocrisy.
Next. To explain why a loss of 125 million rubles, it failed, dumped the responsibility on Pakhtusov - chief of the financial Department. Here's the victim. Why bother? On the London stock exchange ore is in 2019 so much, just multiply the number of tons that damage. A Nitsche, that the incident was in 2017? And I do not care. The investigator and the judge will swallow. So who? The investigator asked to do so or your initiative? Yes Hz, it happened. Che is not like that? This is the dialogue.
Because we are tired of this action, we filed a motion for the recognition of evidence by the prosecution is unacceptable. Well, as I wrote earlier, and as we have stated in his petition in October 2017, the decision about excitation of criminal case under part 2 of article 213 of the criminal code made illegal. Why? Because on the same day, 11 September 2017, a little earlier ruling was made under part 1 of article 213 of the criminal code. And acquainted I was with him in the presence of my counsel of Korinenko, what is the explanation of the lawyer in the case and order them discharged. Then I was questioned by investigator Kobyakov also in the presence of Korinenko, where did you get the 51 article of the Constitution. It was in the afternoon. And in the evening, around 20:00, there was a new resolution with the same number, but with part 2 of article 213, which I was not familiar with. That is the old ruling just destroyed, I understand. In addition, 11.09.2017 on the official website of the Moi of the Chelyabinsk region in 16 hours was information confirming the information on initiation of proceedings is on the part of 1st.213 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE. If a criminal case on the same fact of arson was excited, then in accordance with the code on it must be taken some kind of procedural solution. Currently, the defense has no information about how the decision was made for the case, overturned the decision by the Prosecutor stopped is whether the case. In the case the decision to initiate under part 1 of article 213 of the criminal code, order the counsel, Korinenko S. V. and Protocol of interrogation of the suspect Asadullina with the participation of counsel, Korinenko S. V. no. In short, all this gives reason for the recognition of all subsequent evidence is inadmissible. And this is - and Protocol inspection of the scene, and expert opinion, and the search Protocol, and the decision on the recognition and inclusion to the criminal case of evidence, and seizure Protocol, and copies of documents annexed to the Protocol of the interrogation of the representative of the victim Arkhipova, and Protocol inspection items, etc., etc., etc Tomorrow, the idea is that the judge must resolve our request, either accept or refuse. In any case, it will be interesting. Yes and I'll be questioned tomorrow, most likely.
I pictured the ugly in the background SAU Dolgoderevenskoye. She tried to smile, but failed. Sorry."
Repost Vera Savchenko