The court on the case of Ahtem Chiygoz (106th day of trial) The today's court hearing began with a motion of the defense to bring Akhtem Chyigoz to the courtroom, but the court again refused to consider it, referring to the fact that the court had finally decided this issue.
After that, the defense witness Mamutov Bekir Ablaevich was invited, the interrogation of which was not completed in the previous court session.
Witness Mamutov, responding to questions from the prosecutor, showed that he had not seen the breakthrough of the protesters in the right ranks of police officers, did not see the use of force by militiamen. Then the prosecutor was interested in who invited the witness to the court, to which the witness explained that he was invited by the lawyer Polozov. The prosecutor asked whether the witness discussed with the lawyer Polozov questions for questioning in court, the witness explained that there was no. The lawyer reported only on the procedure for questioning the witness in court. The prosecutor also asked whether the witness gave testimony during the preliminary investigation.
The witness showed that he was summoned for interrogation, he gave evidence to the investigator, but the investigator entered only one tenth of what the witness said. Of all his questions, the investigator entered only one. After that, the prosecutor filed a petition for the disclosure of evidence previously given by the witness, in connection with the significant contradictions expressed in the time when the witness left the rally. The court granted the prosecutor's request. After the announcement, the witness stated that he confirms the testimony he gave in court.
The second prosecution witness today was Mamutova Ekaterina Simmarovna. She showed that she learned of the rally on the morning of February 26, when she was informed about this by her husband. To the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, she came with him around 10 am, but on the spot they were divided. She was for some time near the columns, then she needed to talk on the phone, but the connection near the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC worked poorly, so she was forced to retire for a while. Then she returned, went to the left side of the courtyard, where she was not far from the porch of the central entrance of the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC. There she met her friends the deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC Leonid Pilunsky and his assistant Karina Borisenko. Next to them, she was throughout the event. She saw how Refants Chubarov and Sergey Aksenov spoke from the front porch before the protesters.
The central entrance to the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC worked in regular mode, the doors were not blocked by anyone. Deputies and employees of the apparatus quietly entered and exited through them. The witness knew about the admission regime in the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, because previously there was an economic court and the witness, being a lawyer,. At the same time, the witness noted that despite the large number of "pro-Ukrainian" protesters, none of them made attempts to enter the building, as there was no intention for such actions in people. In the right part of the courtyard were "pro-Russian" protesters with the flags of Russia and the ARC, in the left - "pro-Ukrainian" with the flags of Ukraine and Crimean Tatar national flags. At some point, the "pro-Russian" protesters came close to "pro-Ukrainian" and began to squeeze them out.
For what purpose did such actions take place, the witness did not know. The witness saw Ahtim Chiyhoz several times during the day. At a time when the "pro-Russian" protesters began aggressive actions, he stood between them and "pro-Ukrainian" protesters and called them to calmness. The witness did not hear his words, as it was very noisy, but saw his gestures. He spread his hands to the sides at the level of the hips. The witness unequivocally interpreted his gestures, as appeals to calm down, to move back. She explained that judging by the actions of the protesters, they in the same way perceived the gestures of Ahtim Chiygoz and retreated a little back. The witness did not hear that Ahtem Cheygoz or anyone else called for violence, said "Bay", "Davi" in Russian and Crimean Tatar. The witness did not see the facts of the violence. I saw a crush, but the blows, the use of objects, gas, and t. did not see. The witness was not aware of the penetration of some of the protesters into the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC.
The witness did not see the victims in the crush. According to witness Mamutova, the crush lasted no more than an hour, after which people began to disperse. The witness left the rally alone when she was walking along Gorky Street, then she saw a part of the "pro-Russian" protesters going to parked buses, of which there were at least five.
The third witness of the defense invited on that day to court was Chegertma Ibragim Bekirovich.
He showed that in 2014 he was a member of the Mejlis, worked as a director of the publishing house "Krymuchpedgiz". On February 25, the head of the Mejlis Secretariat Dilyaver Akiev called him and said that a meeting of the Mejlis. The witness arrived at the building on Schmidt Street. There, Refat Chubarov informed the audience that some of the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC initiated an extraordinary session at which they intend to take separatist decisions threatening the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Chubarov offered to hold a mass event near the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC in support of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, while he himself was going to convince the deputies not to make illegal decisions.
The meeting of the Mejlis did not discuss quotas and limits on the number of participants in the event, the issues of organized transportation of participants were not discussed, especially since it was not possible for the Mejlis to organize the delivery of people in such a short time. Organizing the event and notifying the regional Mejlis on its official duties was Zaur Smirnov. No separate assignments were assigned to other members of the Mejlis, including Ahtim Chiygozu. After that the meeting was over and the witness left.
On the morning of February 26, the witness arrived at work, which was 200 meters from the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC. About 10 am I approached the building of the Verkhovna Rada of the ARC. There already gathered "pro-Ukrainian" protesters 300-400 people, there were also participants in the "pro-Russian" rally, which, as the witness knew, was to begin much later - at 14 o'clock. In the morning, the time of "pro-Russian" protesters was significantly less than 70-100 people. An hour later, the witness needed to return to work again. When, 15 minutes later, he again went to the rally, he discovered that at least 6 Ikarus buses with Sevastopol numbers parked from the circus to the cinema in Pushkin Street, from where people came out with Russian flags and plastic bottles of water. When the witness approached the venue of the rally, he was located on the right side at the level of the columns.
To his right and from the front there were "pro-Russian" protesters, behind and on the left "pro-Ukrainian" protesters. The witness saw how a large group of people joined the pro-Russian protesters. It was very noisy, protesters shouted slogans. At some point, the "pro-Russian" protesters began to throw plastic bottles with water in the direction of "pro-Ukrainian" protesters. The witness is sure that they threw the very bottles that he watched from a group of people from buses. Some "pro-Ukrainian" protesters raised the bottles thrown at them and threw them back.
On this, in connection with the expiration of the court's working hours, the interrogation of the witness was suspended. The meeting scheduled for Thursday, April 20, the court for an unknown reason canceled, so the interrogation of the witness will continue on Monday April 24.
Also, the defense's party today announced a petition to change the measure of restraint of Ahtim Chiygoz, but this is in a separate post.
Editorial site is not responsible for the content of blogs. The editorial opinion may differ from the author's.
Join the groups "Browser Blogs" on Facebook and VKontakte, stay tuned!.