This is a continuation of yesterday’s update, in which I promised to explain why 22 April 2016 became the point of no return and the consequence of which was that dozens of officials subsequently became accomplices in the criminal activities of PhosAgro, whose fate now depends on the corrupt capabilities (and desire) of PhosAgro. And since these corruption opportunities are associated with the proximity of PhosAgro to Putin, in fact, the fate of the involved officials began to depend on two factors at once: (1) the preservation of the Putin regime and (2) the preservation of the corruption opportunities (and desire) of PhosAgro. If at least some of this disappears, then the fate of officials may be ruined (they will end up in prison). And it is naive to believe that nothing like this will happen. In the end, all people are mortal, especially since Putin, Litvinenko (the link between PhosAgro and Putin), and the owners of PhosAgro, Guryev and Antoshin, are far from being young people. Unlike them, many officials are very young, for example, one of the investigators (whose photo I could see in her WhatsApp account, unsuccessfully trying to contact her to explain that I am not hiding from her, as she writes in the documents), judging by this photo, just finished her studies and her career has just begun (from the fabricated criminal case).
Moreover, it is impossible to predict what kind of events can radically change the current status quo, and very often they happen suddenly and unexpectedly for everyone. We don’t need to look far for an example - if someone, a couple of days before the start of the YUKOS case (which radically changed the fate of hundreds of people and almost ruined PhosAgro) predicted something like that, then he would be perceived crazy.
Below I will quote the wording of the decision to bring me as an accused, issued 7 years ago, so that it is clear that this is not just an illegal decision, but the delusion of a madman. In a normal situation (without corruption), such a decision is simply impossible to imagine, but the legality and validity of this nonsense were confirmed (by putting signatures) by dozens of officials (investigators, prosecutors and judges). Each such document (and there are hundreds of them, since I sent at least a thousand complaints and other applications) is not only obviously illegal, but also criminal. The fact is that it was not only within the competence of each of the dozens of officials with whom I was in correspondence to cancel such a decision, but IT WAS THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW (because they could not help but understand the delusional nature of what was happening). In Russia there is a serious criminal liability (regardless of corruption and in addition to it) for abuse of power, negligence, making knowingly illegal court decisions, and so on (so-called malfeasance). I think the same procedure is provided for in England either (and, probably, in any other country).
Why am I talking about such a large number of officials? The fact is that the appeal procedure in Russia is very multi-stage and between an ordinary district investigator and the head of the investigative body of the city (in this case St. Petersburg) I had to go through at least 6 intermediate instances (something like several deputy deputies). And in order to reach the head of the Investigative Committee of all Russia, it is necessary to overcome at least 5-8 more intermediate stages, and I have not yet been able to go through this path to the end, since the head of the Investigative Committee Bastrykin is well aware of my case and does not want to put his signature under a deliberately insane decision and therefore for me, the number of intermediate stages artificially increased almost to infinity.
Exactly the same story with prosecutor's offices. Less complicated system in the courts. In general, in the end, at least 50 officials have signed the obviously illegal (criminal) documents regarding my criminal case.
Do not think that these documents have at least some justification. In response to my hundreds of pages of facts, evidence and legal arguments, I always received short half-page replies saying that the lower official was right, and that is all (without explanation). At the same time, the law obliges each official to consider absolutely every argument, evidence, and the like and give an answer on the merits of each of them. But since the situation is absolutely delusional, it is simply impossible to come up with any arguments in favor of it - this explains the brevity and meaninglessness of the answers. In English courts, such answers would be called totally without merits (TWOM).
Before quoting the delusional and fatal document, it is also necessary to add that, of course, on that fateful day, as in the previous few months (certain events preceded the compilation of the fatal document), no one in PhosAgro and in the investigative body corrupted by it could even imagine that events after the compilation of the delusional document will develop as they began to develop in reality. By the way, this is back to the question of unpredictability. No one could have imagined that I would not be frightened and that I would actively defend myself, and the number of my complaints and other submissions would exceed 1000. Moreover, it was originally planned that the criminal case would last a maximum of a couple of months and be closed and forgotten (or perhaps that it was even planned, that it will “accidentally” burn down, so that all that nonsense, in principle, would be impossible to discover in the future).
The decision to bring me in as an accused dated exactly seven years ago was preceded by a demonstrative search, which was conducted by a team of about 10 people, a service dog and attesting witnesses, who "quite by chance" turned out to be two employees of the PhosAgro security service. During the search, my passport was seized so that I was not able to leave Russia, and I was given 8 days before my arrest to think about the "peace offer" of PhosAgro consisted in the fact that the amount of PhosAgro's obligations to me is reduced by 5 times and in addition I must pay a fantastic bribe of $4 million to those who were conducting the search (the investigators) for "mediation". But another unforeseen accident happened – a couple of weeks before that, I had received a second passport, which at the time of the search was in the English embassy. I was able to leave and was conducting "negotiations" already from abroad, recording everything on a dictaphone.
And when PhosAgro and the corrupt investigators realized that their plan had collapsed, they found themselves in a fatal dilemma. Then there was still an option to play back, quietly terminating the delusional criminal case, but PhosAgro chose another option – to declare me accused, and this is the point of no return. It is unknown what motivated PhosAgro shareholders when they were making such a decision. Maybe they just wanted to save face – was it in vain that they organized such a large-scale search, tried to take me hostage and conducted "negotiations"?
So, what does my accusation sound like. My lawyer at the time, Valery Stepanov, briefly described it for the English court in this way: “This accusation (dated 04/22/16) indicated that the investigation did not find out nine circumstances related to the secret penetration of an unknown person into the Antoshin's house, but nevertheless has found out that it had been Sychev who organized it. There was no evidence of this. According to the Criminal Code such an accusation is no more than a confirmation of the innocence of Sychev in the form of at least unproved involvement. But contrary to the law, Sychev was recognized as the accused”.
______________________________
ORDER
on the involvement of a person as an accused
St. Petersburg 22 April 2016
Senior investigator of the investigation department for Vasileostrovsky district of the Main Investigation Department for St. Petersburg of the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation A.E. Gall having considered the documents of criminal case No 304669
HAS FOUND:
Sufficient evidence has been collected in the framework of the criminal case to recognize Sychev Igor committed extortion (i.e. demanding the transfer of another person's property under the threats) by acting together in collusion with a group of persons with the purpose of obtainment of property in a particularly large amount, namely;
I. Sychev at not found out during the investigation time but not later than on 14.05.2015, acting willfully and with mercenary motives with the purpose of unlawful enrichment, being in a not found out during the investigation location, using not found out during the investigation technical means carried out the audio recording of his communications with I.D. Antoshin.
Continuing his criminal intent I. Sychev at not found out during the investigation time but not later than on 14.05.2015, being in a not found out during the investigation location, handed over to a person not found out during the investigation a document drawn up by him and containing the demand to I.D. Antoshin to transfer 1% of shares of PhosAgro under the threats, and instructed a not found out during the investigation person to bring the mentioned demands and threats to I.D. Antoshin.
The not found out during investigation person at not found out during the investigation time but not later than on 14.05.2015, being in the house, located at the address <…>, acting on I. Sychev's instructions, put into the post box of apartment <…>, belonging to I.D. Antoshin, the mentioned document contained the demand to transfer 1% of shares of PhosAgro under the threats.
Continuing his criminal intent, from 14.05.2015 to 20.05.2015, I. Sychev being in a not found out during the investigation location handed over to a person not found out during the investigation the transcripts of audio recordings of communications with I.D. Antoshin, and instructed a person not found out during the investigation to transmit the mentioned transcripts to I.D. Antoshin in order to create a sense of the reality of earlier stated threats.
A not found out during the investigation person at not found out during the investigation time but not later than on 14.05.2015 being in the house located at the address <…>, acting on I. Sychev’s instructions, put into the post box of apartment No <…> of the mentioned house belonging to I.D. Antoshin the verbatim records of earlier communications with I.D. Antoshin, that is committed the offence provided for under Art. 163(3)(b) of the Criminal Code.
On basis of the above and in accordance with Art. 171, 172 of the Criminal Procedure Code
DECIDED:
To recognize Sychev Igor as an accused in the criminal case for the commitment of the crime provided for under Art. 163(3)(b) of the Criminal Code and to inform him thereabout.
Senior investigator A.E. Gall
_______________________________________________________
It would not be superfluous to recall that the document and the transcripts that allegedly ended up in Antoshin's apartment mailbox turned out to be the documents that I sent to the addressees (including Antoshin) six months earlier quite officially with three signatures (mine, of a lawyer and a notary). But for some reason, these documents got into the apartment mailbox without signatures. It's about my pre-trial claim with supporting evidence, and the only threat mentioned there is that I'll go to court.
So, as everyone can see, the extremely smart investigator worthy of a Nobel Prize was able to solve a problem with nine unknowns and only one known (more on that in a bit) and find out that exactly I was the one who did all this unknown. The specificity of the only known (the address of the incident) in this equation is such that this known circumstance should, on the contrary, make the equation absolutely unsolvable, since the house in which, under a variety of unknown circumstances, the alleged crime happened, is so strictly guarded that it turned out to be the only one in all of Russia, the strictest security system of which the press devoted an entire article, comparing the house with a maximum security prison. And it should be noted that this article was by no means laudatory or advertising (in order to advertise an incredible security system), it was written in connection with complaints from residents of the house who could hardly get into their apartments (the fact is that many high-ranking officials, including the Governor of St. Petersburg, live in this house).
Of course, under normal conditions (without the influence of corruption), such a decision could not be made in principle. And if it were issued, then the investigator who did it would either be immediately imprisoned for committing a crime, or sent to a psychiatrist for a sanity check. Also, under normal conditions (without the influence of corruption), one short complaint would be enough to reverse such a decision. I sent at least 1,000 of them, and that is why so many officials were drawn into this criminal cycle. And at each new stage, it was more and more difficult to play back, since the number of people already involved in this criminal activity was measured by an increasing number of people whose faces also needed to be kept. As a result, this story has turned into a vicious circle that can collapse (be exposed with all the ensuing consequences) at any moment and completely unexpectedly.
In yesterday's announcement, I also promised to explain what is the analogy with the decision of the English judge Mr Beltrami KC, who, considering a seemingly insignificant issue and forgetting to tell me that he is closely connected with PhosAgro's lawyers, essentially closed my access to justice. This analogy is very simple - his decision for the English proceedings became the same in essence and in terms of possible future consequences, which was the delusional decision dated seven years ago for the Russian part of this story. That is, it launched exactly the same explosive and unpredictable mechanism, which may eventually involve an indefinite number of people who will find themselves in the same position of the actual hostages of PhosAgro and the natural unpredictability of the future. And while events are developing in such a way that they show that PhosAgro intends to move in this direction, which is destructive and unpredictable in terms of consequences.
Finally, I want to tell an "anecdote". According to the criminal case, the investigating authority and the victims (PhosAgro) believe that I am hiding from them and they do not know where I am (for this reason they do not want to actively investigate the criminal case, which I insist on). In the framework of the English lawsuit, I personally met with PhosAgro's lawyers in the courtroom at least 4 times and asked them to comment on this paradox. I didn't receive an answer.