Account of Judicial Proceedings

...or the FSB and report this, because my case might be repeated, and you yourselves will be accused of a threat of terrorism. I realized that the methods of the KGB of past years are no different from the methods of the FSB. They transfer their miscalculations and mistakes onto innocent people, and those who know about these shortcomings of the FSB, they try to deprive of their freedom.

I hoped for a fair judicial review of the criminal case in the Moscow City Court, especially since the hearing of the case was already being conducted under the new Criminal Procedure Code (UPK) of the RF. Previously, I had heard about various contract judicial processes in the Moscow City Court. I confirm that there will be five more new UPKs of the RF, but with the same judges, the defendant and his defenders are still nobodies before the presiding judge. In this case, the presiding federal judge of the Moscow City Court, Komarova M. A., conducted the process just as under the old UPK. That is, she was the complete mistress of the process. She could command the secretary what to write in the protocol and what not to write. Although everything said by me and my defender was entered into the protocol, the judge only has the right to reject questions or remarks. From the way the judge corrected some of the parties' answers, I realized that there would be nothing more for me in this court except a guilty verdict.

Issues with the Trial

• The judge unreasonably rejected the lawyer's questions, which he asked the witnesses about whether they saw explosives or action plans for house bombings with me, explaining that this was not relevant to the case. It was strange to hear from the judge that I was charged with such a serious crime as a threat of terrorism, while at the same time the presence of explosives with me is not relevant to the case.
• Judge Komarova did everything to ensure that the witness—an employee of the central apparatus of the MVD of the RF, whom I approached and informed about the received messages about the bombings in Moscow as early as August 30, 1999—was not summoned to court and questioned about these circumstances. Twice I and my defender filed such motions, but they were unreasonably rejected by the court. I realized that the task of the court is to ensure that the testimony of the MVD employee, who would confirm the fact of my approaching him and meeting with other responsible officials of the MVD and FSB, was not entered into the court session protocol.

Discrepancies in Testimony

• Initially in court, I gave erroneous testimony that the information was given by me after the first explosion on Manezhnaya Square in Moscow on August 31, 1999.
• Then, in a conversation with a witness invited to court by the defense (that MVD employee who received information from me on August 30, 1999) on August 14 at 1:45 PM near the Moscow City Court building, the employee told me that he had pulled up the information that was sent from the MVD to the FSB, and it stated that I had reported the planned bombings on August 30, 1999.

Denial of Rights

• Even the witness invited by the defense, an employee of the central MVD of the RF who was in the court corridor on August 14 at 2:00 PM, was intentionally not questioned by the court.
• Thus, the court illegally deprived me of the opportunity to use the note to Art. 205 of the UK RF (A person who participated in the preparation of an act of terrorism is exempt from criminal liability if they, by timely warning the authorities or in another way, contributed to preventing the implementation of the act of terrorism).
• Judge Komarova did not give me and my lawyer the opportunity to prepare for the debates, despite our motions that time was needed to analyze everything and speak in the debates. Judge Komarova unreasonably rejected these motions, and I was deprived of the opportunity to prepare for the debates and the final word. Judge Komarova rushed the process very quickly. Mostly, defense motions were rejected.

I fear for my life, I fear that at the behest of the FSB, the Moscow City Court will lock me away for a long term in places of deprivation of liberty, so that society does not know about

On the recording of the cassation judicial collegium for criminal cases of the Supreme Court of the RF, falsification is registered - Art. 384, 413, part 3, items 1, 2; 379, part 1, item 2 - and violation of the application of articles leading to the reversal of the sentence!!!

UPK RF Art. 271, 24 violated