The case of Ushakov and Others in Vyselki

Senior investigator of the Korenovsky Interdistrict Investigation Department of the Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Krasnodar Territory A. A. Garmash initiates a criminal case against 41-year-old Vitaly Ushakov, 46-year-old Yevgeniy Bochko, 48-year-old Valery Vechkaev and 39-year-old disabled person of group I Alexei Shubnikov. According to the investigation, in the period from July 31, 2020 to July 4, 2021, the believers "took active organizational actions aimed at continuing ... Activities... organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses in the village of Vyselki, expressed in the convening, opening and closing of meetings, the organization of religious speeches and worship ... coordination of the course of meetings, suggestions of topics for discussion, and the implementation of other preaching activities. They are charged with Part 1 of Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

As part of the criminal case, at least 31 searches are being carried out in the villages of Vyselki, Berezanskaya, Buzinovskaya, Novodonetskaya, Zhuravskaya, in the village of Gazyr, the village of Zarya, and the Beysuzhek Second farm. Another search is taking place in Novorossiysk. In total, at least 51 people are affected, including those who are not Jehovah's Witnesses. Among the victims of the actions of the security forces are three elderly women, one of whom is 75 years old, and the other two are over 80. Electronic devices, bank cards and personal records were seized from believers.

Vitaliy Ushakov and Yevgeniy Bochko are interrogated at the Korenovsk Investigative Committee. Aleksey Shubnikov is being interrogated at the Investigative Committee department in Vyselki, where he was obliged to report on his own. After the interrogations, Vitaliy is placed in a temporary detention facility, and Yevgeniy and Aleksey are allowed to go home.

Law enforcement officers do not find Valery Vechkayev at home, so they break down the front door and conduct a search without the presence of the owners. The security forces armed with machine guns who came home to Vechkayev's youngest daughter and mother-in-law are not allowed to enter. They spend several hours on the street, as a result of which the daughter falls ill.

The judge of the Vyselkovsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory, Alexander Kalchevsky, elects Vitaly Ushakov a measure of restraint in the form of detention for a period of 2 months, until April 11 inclusive.

Ruslan Teplukhin, judge of the Vyselkovsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory, imposes restrictions on Yevgeniy Bochko and Alexei Shubnikov in the form of a ban on certain actions. Believers cannot visit a number of public places, use the Internet, communicate with other defendants in the criminal case, as well as with their fellow believers. In addition, they cannot leave the Vyselkovsky district.

Vitaliy Ushakov's wife is subjected to a second search.

The Vyselkovsky District Court chooses a measure of restraint for Valery Vechkayev in the form of a ban on certain actions.

He is forbidden to leave the Vyselkovsky district, visit railway stations, shopping centers, entertainment venues, cafes and restaurants, use the Internet and telephone (except for calling emergency services and resolving judicial issues). He is also forbidden to communicate with 43 fellow believers.

Investigator A. Garmash initiates a new criminal case against a resident of the village of Vyselki. 76-year-old Vladimir Kolesnikov is suspected of organizing an extremist association (Part 1 of Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

The reason for initiating the case is a report based on the materials of operational-search activities provided by the department of the FSB in the Krasnodar Territory in the city of Tikhoretsk.

According to the investigation, Kolesnikov, together with Ushakov, Bochko, Vechkaev and Shubnikov, carried out "illegal" activities: "convening, opening and closing meetings, organizing religious speeches and services at these meetings, coordinating meetings, proposing topics for discussion, and carrying out other preaching activities."

It becomes known that the case of Kolesnikov and the case of Ushakov and others are combined into one proceeding.

Vladimir Kolesnikov is chosen as a measure of restraint in the form of a ban on certain actions.

The Vyselkovsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory once again extends Vitaliy Ushakov's detention. The believer intends to appeal this ruling.

Vitaliy Ushakov was released under house arrest from the pre-trial detention center, where he stayed for almost 7 months. From Krasnodar, he goes back to Vyselki.

The decision was made by the Krasnodar Regional Court in response to Ushakov's appeal to extend the period of detention. The following restrictions are imposed on the believer: he is forbidden to leave the home, communicate with the defendants in the case and fellow believers, use means of communication, receive and send postal correspondence.

The court softens the measure of restraint for Vitaly Ushakov from house arrest to a ban on certain actions. However, he is still forbidden, among other things, to leave the territory of the Vyselkovsky district, visit railway stations, airports, shopping centers, cafes and restaurants, use the telephone, mail and the Internet.

The first hearing in the Vyselkovsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory on the merits of the case of Vitaly Ushakov. Referee — Aleksandr Kalchevsky.

20 people come to the courtroom to support the believers, 9 of them are allowed into the courtroom as observers.

The judge recalls the motion filed on June 15, 2023 by the defense. Its essence lies in the fact that replaced sheets appeared in the case materials, in connection with which it is necessary to compare the information contained in these documents with those case materials that were photographed by the defendant Shubnikov in February 2022.

The court begins to compare the photographs of the case materials taken earlier by the defendant with the current ones, as well as to study the protocols of familiarization with the case materials. The defense draws the attention of the judge and the state prosecutor to the discrepancy between the materials. The prosecutor proposes to summon investigator I. S. Shutenko to the court to explain this circumstance. The judge asks Shubnikov to show the original documents he photographed in February.

The judge proposes to interrogate the witness Shutenko at the request of the prosecution.

The investigator claims that the defendants familiarized themselves with the case materials twice - before the investigation and after, and the case materials were not embroidered, nothing was added or subtracted. He also claimed that he had familiarized all the defendants with the 17 volumes of the case, but they allegedly refused to sign the protocol of acquaintance.

The defense voices its disagreement with the testimony of the investigator and declares that it is going to file a petition for an examination of the previously photographed case materials, as well as for a handwriting examination of the familiarization protocol, which, in its opinion, was replaced.

The prosecutor and the judge believe that even if the case file was changed, this does not change the essence, but the lawyer argues that this deprived the defendants of the right to prepare for the trial.

The lawyer of the defendant Shubnikov submits to the prosecutor for review a petition for the appointment of forensic handwriting and photographic examinations. The judge informs that it is too early to file this petition, since the previous motion to return the criminal case to the prosecutor has not yet been resolved.

The lawyer of the defendant Shubnikov reads out an addendum to the petition for the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor, which lists 170 violations in fulfilling the requirements of Art. 217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (familiarization of the accused and his defense counsel with the materials of the criminal case). The judge invites the participants of the trial to familiarize themselves with the submitted materials. A break is announced until October 17, 2023.

Everyone is allowed to enter the hall, even bring extra chairs.

The state prosecutor reads out the charges. All the defendants deny their guilt, call the accusation far-fetched and want to speak out after examining all the evidence.

In connection with the refusal of Yevgeniy Bochko from a lawyer by appointment, a lawyer enters the case by agreement.

The court attaches to the case file medical documents on the health of Yevgeniy Bochko, confirming a valid reason for his absence at the two previous hearings. Alexei Shubnikov's certificate on the limitation of physical activity due to his disability is also attached. He requested the adjournment of meetings due to outpatient treatment.

The assistant prosecutor begins to consider written materials, in particular portrait examinations of each defendant.

The lawyer notes that when studying these examinations, the expert showed personal initiative and examined irrelevant material, and also used outdated methods.

Then the prosecution proceeds to the consideration of a comprehensive psychological and linguistic religious author's examination.

The assistant prosecutor proceeds to the consideration of the third (final) - psychological - part of the comprehensive examination. The court agrees to hear the comments of the defense.

Commenting, the public defender draws attention to the fact that the examination was prepared in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure and not on the basis of audio and video recordings, as instructed by the investigator, but on the basis of a transcript made by law enforcement agencies. In addition, experts often used words and expressions that distorted God's name. The defender cites a number of proofs that the name of God is often used in various translations of the Bible and literary works of famous Russian writers and poets. The judge asks for these explanations to be provided in printed form.

The public defender continues to read out the comments on the expert opinion on 35 pages. He notes that, according to the findings of a linguistic expert, Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to education, but that he himself worked as a teacher in an art school and had several children of the accused Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as the daughter of a secret witness.

In addition, the experts themselves chose which material to examine, and not the one that the investigator provided them. Also, trying to show signs of hierarchy, the experts did not understand what role the defendants play in this association, and police major V. S. Nagernyak inserted his own speculations into the transcript, after which the experts built their conclusions on them.

The assistant prosecutor continues to read out the written materials of the case, including the protocols of the search and examination of material evidence of the three defendants.

The court examines the written materials: the protocols of the search and inspection of the defendants Shubnikov and Ushakov. The lawyers note that all the seized material evidence attached to the case file has no evidence base.

The lawyer draws the court's attention to the fact that the investigator A.A. Garmash did not examine the disks with video recordings, but identification, which, as he notes, is unacceptable. The lawyer also lists the topics of the worship services that appear in the case: "How can we cultivate peacefulness in a world full of anger?", "Treat life as a wonderful gift", "Be patient". He expresses bewilderment, and asks: "How do these topics support accusations of extremism?"

The Assistant Prosecutor reads out the materials on the statutory activities of the LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses. The lawyer draws attention to the fact that the Supreme Court liquidated the LRO not for its statutory activities, since it fully complied with the law.

The court continues to examine the written materials of the case and the results of the operational-search activities. The defense declares that these documents are not evidence of a crime and reflect the purely personal opinion of operational officers.

The judge grants the request of the defence to include in the case file the sources referred to by the public defender during one of the hearings.

The lawyer notes that the religious expert Kurganov, who participated in the preparation of the examination, is a specialist in another field - theology, which means that he could not have conducted this examination.

The court continues to consider the results of the operational-search measures.

Counsel draws attention to the fact that the prosecution refers to a document that does not relate to the period imputed to the defendant and uses it as evidence of the continuation of the prohibited activity. The defense also informs the court that the documents on operational and investigative activities were drawn up with violations.

The lawyer draws attention to the violations committed during the compilation of the transcripts of the services. In particular, there is no information in the case about how the participants in the services were identified with the defendants. In the opinion of the defender, detective V. Nagernyak stated his conjectures instead of carrying out the identification procedure provided for by law.

The study of the transcripts of the services continues. The lawyer points out that the secret witness under the pseudonym "Shepherd" appears in the transcripts for 2021, however, according to the documents, such a pseudonym was assigned to him only in 2022. The defense considers this a sign of falsification of transcripts.

The secret witness does not appear for questioning. The lawyer asks to forcibly bring him to court, since the defense knows where he is. The judge denies because, in his opinion, it could declassify the witness.

Interrogation of a secret witness under the pseudonym "Shepherd". The court rejects the defence's request for ordinary questioning.

A secret witness says that he voluntarily studied the Bible in the early 1990s and attended services of Jehovah's Witnesses. According to him, he met the defendants in the worship building during a Christian meeting.

When asked by the lawyer whether he received threats of murder, violence or destruction of property from the defendants and their fellow believers, the secret witness answers in the negative. During interrogation, he reveals that he has a personal grudge against Jehovah's Witnesses.