Precedent: The First Terrorist?

The absolutely closed nature of not only the investigation but also the trial makes one doubt that this case is the first success in the fight against terrorism in the capital.

"MN" has addressed the strange circumstances of this story twice (No. 24 for 1997 and No. 42 for 1998).

Background of the Incident

• On December 27, 1994, at the very beginning of the Chechen war, an empty bus was blown up with an ammonite stick at the final stop of Route No. 33 near VDNKh.
• The driver escaped with a slight scare; no one else was hurt.
• The main suspect, Vladimir V., was arrested only in August 1996, shortly after the explosions of two trolleybuses in Moscow.

The Suspect and Evidence

By that time, V. was a retired lieutenant colonel engaged in small business, who had previously taught (he is a Candidate of Technical Sciences) at the academy.

• In 1997, the newspaper "Moskovsky Komsomolets" reported on the imminent solving of the "terrorist attack" (apparently at the suggestion of the investigation).
• As evidence of V.'s guilt, the article reported that he:
  • "...while a student at a military school, made a firecracker for fun and tried to throw it out of the dormitory window..."

V. was identified as an accomplice in the bus bombing by his business acquaintance Akimov.

• Akimov had previously been arrested in a completely different case and gave a "voluntary confession" while in custody.
• Akimov was being sent for a psychiatric evaluation and repeatedly changed his testimony.
• Akimov reported that the bus was blown up on the orders of a certain Chechen; however, the "customer" of the terrorist attack never appeared before the court.

In general, due to the closed nature of the trial, it remains unknown whether any more weightier evidence of the terrorist's guilt was presented to the court.

The Verdict and Proceedings

A sentence was passed:

• The judge, whose surname the Moscow City Court office refused to give, sentenced V. to three years of imprisonment.
• This sentence was notable because the article of the code establishing responsibility for terrorism specifies a term of 5 to 10 years as a sanction.
• However, the terrorist had already been in pretrial detention for exactly three years by that point, so he was released from the courtroom.
• Vladimir V.'s sister stated that her brother is in a serious psychological state and does not want to meet with any journalists.

Official Statements

• Nina Barkova, the state prosecutor in this trial (a representative of the Moscow City Prosecutor's Office), requested exactly three years of imprisonment, citing that V. had no prior convictions, has children, and is characterized positively in his service. She refused to name other details of the case, citing secrecy.
• Viktor Lyutikov, another employee of the Moscow prosecutor's office, stated in a conversation with an "MN" correspondent:
  > "It is strange that judges and prosecutors hide the details of this case. However, by law, they are not obliged to tell the public all the circumstances of a trial in which a sentence has already been passed. As for the extremely short term for terrorism, I was the state prosecutor in the case of a mentally ill couple who threatened to blow up the 'Tsentralnaya' hotel. Terrorism was evident, but I requested only one year of imprisonment for the man."

Conclusion

Due to the numerous oddities and the secrecy of this case, the ability to evaluate the professionalism of both the investigation and its operational support is limited. For the same reasons, it is difficult to judge the prospects for solving and investigating the new terrorist acts just committed in Moscow, which have already led to far more tragic consequences.

Dmitry BALBUROV,
Leonid NIKITINSKY

MOSCOW NEWS No. 35, 1999

In August, the Moscow City Court delivered a verdict on an act of terror committed in December 1994.

[Photo caption:] A trolleybus blown up in 1996. Now it seems like a prank...