Суд мести

26 January 2005. A new panel of jurors is selected. Twelve jurors and four reserves are chosen from just 28 candidates. The first jury was chosen from 60.

From the outset, prosecutors Naydenov and Kashayev feed disinformation to journalists. Although neither was present at the first trial in autumn, they say that the previous jury was disbanded because the defence team were playing for time. In fact, the trial was repeatedly adjourned because of Judge Olikhver's imaginary illness.

28 January 2005. No proceedings in court because the two defendants are absent.

3 February 2005. No proceedings in court because defence lawyer Georgiy Kaganer is unwell.

7 February 2005. Moscow City Court chairwoman Olga Yegorova applies to the Ministry of Justice with a request for Pichugin's entire defence team of four lawyers to be barred from practice. The Moscow legal community interpret this as another attack on lawyers defending the Yukos case.

14 February 2005. The defence applies for Judge Olikhver to be removed from the case, on the grounds that her conduct is tendentious and indicates her inability to try the case independently. The application is turned down, as is another application for an open trial as demanded by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

The state prosecutor then outlines the charges against Pichugin and Peshkun. Pichugin pleads not guilty to all charges. Peshkun makes a partial confession of guilt but disagrees with the wording of the charge. The court then begins its examination of Peshkun.

15 February 2005. Peshkun's testimony continues. Injured party Viktor Kolesov is also called. As in the first trial in autumn 2004, he tells the court that he has no reason to link Pichugin, whom he does not know, to the attempt on his life.

16 February 2005. The prosecution's main witness, murderer and rapist Igor Korovnikov, is called. He repeats what he said at the autumn trial.

On the same day the newspaper Russkiy Kuryer reports on its own investigation into why the first jury was disbanded. After contacting former jurors, it concludes that it was because they wanted to acquit Pichugin.

22 February 2005. Olga Kostina and Yekaterina Rozhkova are called. As at the first trial, Kostina speaks of her difficult relationship with Leonid Nevzlin and says she believes Pichugin organised the explosion on Nevzlin's instructions. Asked why she thinks that, she replies that she heard it from investigators. Rozhkova repeats her testimony from the first trial: she was a secretary to Nevzlin, who asked her to fetch Kostina's file from records when Pichugin was in his office.

24 February 2005. Prosecution witness Mikhail Yastrubitskiy is called. He says he was on friendly terms with the Kostin family, and that twice after the explosion Kostina told him she thought the most likely reasons behind it were disputes with Sergey Tsoy, who was the Moscow mayor's press secretary, and also other mayoralty officials.

Sergey Lobikov is questioned, as are security guards from the Moscow Palace of Youth where, according to the prosecution, Pichugin threatened to kill Lobikov. There are major inconsistencies between Lobikov's and guards' stories.

Начало | << | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | >>

« в начало

Создание сайта
Алгософт