Source: www.rucriminal.info
At the disposal of Rucriminal.info and the telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU, there were two resolutions, the first on the involvement as an accused, and the second on the termination of criminal prosecution, issued at different times against the lawyer-fixer Eduard Budantsev, close to the FSB of the Russian Federation. The decision to prosecute as a defendant was issued in 2016 and signed by the head of the Main Investigative Committee of the Investigative Committee for Moscow, Major General of Justice Drymanov (currently serving a sentence on charges of allegedly taking a bribe). The decision to terminate the criminal prosecution of Budantsev and other persons was signed by Major General of Justice Krivorotov, Senior Investigator for Particularly Important Cases under the Chairman of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, in 2018.
When studying these decisions, it becomes clear that the circumstances that were established by General Alexander Drymanov are fundamentally different from the conclusions of General Krivorotov. General Drymanov, in the course of the investigation, established the following, that “... So, Budantsev E.V. and unidentified by the investigation person 14.12.2015, in the period from 21 h. 45 min. until 22 o'clock. 06 min., being in a public place - on the street veranda of the restaurant "Elements" (Elemente), located at the address: Moscow, st. Rochdelskaya, 15, building 1, during the conflict that took place in the same place Kitaev A.A., Domaskin F.N. and G.V. In the specified period of time Budantsev E.V. and a person unidentified by the investigation, developed a joint plan for committing a crime and distributed criminal roles among themselves. So, according to what was reached between the accomplices ... "
That is, in simple terms, Budantsev and unidentified persons committed a gang murder and a number of other criminal offenses.
The editors agree with the conclusions of General Drymanov, they are beyond doubt and are fully consistent with the materials of the criminal cases.
From the decision to terminate the criminal prosecution of Budantsev, signed by investigator Krivorotov, it becomes clear how and in what chronological sequence significant procedural decisions took place and which of the officials was behind these decisions. Editorial experts carefully studied this decision and compared it with the materials of criminal cases and evidence. Previously, the editors have repeatedly published testimonies of witnesses, audio and video recordings from the scene, and expert opinions. The conclusion of the editorial experts is unequivocal, the information set out in the decision of the investigator Krivorotov is untrue, false and does not agree with objective evidence in criminal cases.
Here are some examples of obvious inconsistencies. The facts stated in the decision are refuted by video recording, audio recording, details of telephone conversations, the conclusion of experts, as well as the testimony of witnesses.
From the decision of the investigator Krivorotov, “.... The investigation established that on December 14, 2015, E.V. evening, at the invitation of Kim. Arrived at the restaurant "Elements" to settle the financial claims against the latter from Misikova F.T. At the same time, Kostrichenko V.V. and Cherchintsev P.V. were armed with firearms of limited destruction, and Budantsev E.V. premium rifled short-barreled firearms Beretta 92 pistol"
These allegations of the investigator were refuted during the judicial investigation:
- Budantsev arrived at the restaurant not at the invitation of Kim, but on behalf of the Kazakh oligarch Kenes Rakishev. It has been documented that Budantsev and Kim met at the Elements restaurant on 12/14/2015, before the events they did not know each other. In conversations, Budantsev and the company are called "Fighters from the Chief." (confirmed by audio recording, detailing and testimony of witnesses)
- Budantsev arrived not to settle financial disputes, but as a power support, on behalf of the Kazakh oligarch Kenes Rakishev. (confirmed by audio recording, details and testimonies of witnesses) It follows from the materials of the case that Budantsev did not take part in the negotiations, did not introduce himself as a lawyer to anyone, including Kim Zh. Kim perceived Budantsev as a police officer.
From the decision of the investigator “... When trying to resolve a financial dispute between Kostrichenko V.V. Cherchintsev P.V. and Budantsev E.V. on the one hand, Kitaev A.A. and Romanov E.A. on the other hand, a conflict arose, during which Romanov E.A. offered to find out the relationship on the street. After that, the parties to the conflict continued to sort things out on the veranda of the restaurant, where Kitaev A.A. began to demonstrate BudaE.V. Ntsev and other who arrived with those persons their weapons. In response to these actions Budantsev E.V. also demonstrated to his opponents the pistol he had with him.
- The conflict between those present did not begin because of the resolution of a financial dispute, but on the basis of a sudden personal hostile relationship associated with an attempt in a rude manner by Budantsev and Kostrichenko to enter the VIP room, without explaining to those present, including security officers, the motives his behavior and without introducing himself. Kim was in the VIP room and was silent, thinking that Budantsev was a police officer.
- During the trial, it was established that it was Budantsev and Kostrichenko who proposed to go out into the street to continue clarifying the relationship.
- The video recording shows that the employee of the private security company Kitaev did not demonstrate weapons to those present, but only keeps his hand on the holster (not prohibited by the current legislation on weapons).
- The video recording shows that Budantsev did not participate in the conversations on the veranda, stood aside, while at some point he unmotivatedly pulled out a pistol from his holster and pointed the weapon at others, thereby creating a real threat to people on the veranda. (such behavior is expressly prohibited by gun laws)
From the decision of the investigator “......After the demonstration of Budantseva E.V. weapons at the command of Kochuykov A.N. Sinitsym A.V. Domaskin F.N. Kitaev A.A. and Gonovichev S.D. subjected to beating Budantseva E.V. causing moderate bodily harm to the latter ..."
-As established by the judicial investigation Kochuykov A.GN. he did not give any commands to the security officers, the guards acted independently on the basis of instructions, after an obvious threat from Budantsev, who took out a gun and declared “I will shoot everyone!”.
From the decision of the investigator “..... In response to the actions of the attackers Kostrichenko V.V. applied against Kitaeva A.A. traumatic weapon, as a result of which those who beat Budantsev E.V. persons stopped beating him and fled, and Kitaev A.A. began to produce in the direction of Kostrichenko V.V. and Budantseva E.V. shots from the traumatic pistol he had with him from a distance of more than five meters. At this time, freed from the capture of Sinitsin A.V. Budantsev E.V. sent towards Kitaev A.A. Domaskina F.N. Berezina G.V. and Savicheva S.D. and, having reduced the distance with them, fired at least 7 shots at them from his Beret 92 pistol.
As a result of the shots Budantsev E.The. caused Kitaev A.A. and Domaskin F.N. gunshot wound incompatible with life, Berezina G.V. gunshot wound that caused serious bodily harm.
The foregoing is fully supported by the evidence collected in the case.
- In the chronology of what happened, investigator Krivorotov, apparently deliberately did not indicate that the first shots were fired by Budantsev E.V. in his friend Malakaev. Cause, careless or criminal handling of weapons. (Budantsev carries a pistol with the fuse already removed and the cartridge sent into the barrel, which is also prohibited by the law on weapons)
-After Budantsev's shots, the next weapon was used by Kostrichenko, while the video shows that Kostrichenko is shooting at Kochuykov's back and at the guards lying on the floor. Kitaev used a traumatic pistol only after being shot at by Kostrichenko and Budantsev.
- Investigator Krivorotov did not indicate in the decision that the driver Domaskin was killed at the moment when he was dragging the wounded Kitaev away and did not pose any threat to Budantsev. Gonovichev, Berezin, Romanov received gunshot wounds and serious bodily harm when they did not pose any threat to Budantsev.
Investigator Krivorotov did not evaluate the frankly false and inconsistent testimony of Budantsev, which formed the basis of the verdict, of illegally convicted police officers Romashkin, Shakirov, Zinatulin.
The information presented in the decision of investigator Krivorotov is completely refuted, casting doubt on his competence and suggesting his personal criminal interest in concealing objective facts.
Was it possible for investigator Krivorotov to issue a deliberately illegal decision without the support of the staff of the Prosecutor General's Office? No!
According to a Rucriminal.info source, Budantsev and the Kazakh oligarch Kenes Rakishev avoided criminal responsibility through the prosecutor's office, with the support of the FSB, was provided by the team of the former Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Chaika and was personally supervised by the Deputy Prosecutor General of Russia Viktor Grin.
Grin, actively participated in the fabrication of the criminal prosecution of the TFR employees, it was Grin who, violating the procedural jurisdiction, transferred the criminal case against Maksimenko, Drymanov, Kramarenko to the Investigation Department of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, controlled by Budantsev's patrons, about an alleged bribe from the people of the thief "Shakro Molodoy".
Editorial sources have no doubt that the criminal case against Budantsev will be reopened as soon as his patron is removed from office. I am from the CA of the FSB, and the officials who ensured Budantsev's departure from criminal liability will suffer a well-deserved punishment.
We hope that our journalistic investigation will be of interest to the Prosecutor General of Russia Igor Krasnov and the decision to terminate the criminal prosecution against E.V. Budantsev. will be canceled as illegal, and the criminal case on the murders will be objectively investigated and sent to court.
Timofey Grishin
To be continued
Source: www.rucriminal.info
