Source: returns to the topic of the death of the head of the police department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, Alexander Aksenov. The investigation assessed the incident as a hunting accident. They say that Aksenov was accidentally hit by former policeman Evgeny Piklovsky. However, all the facts and circumstances indicate that a planned murder took place.

On January 9, 2024, in the Trans-Baikal Territory, based on complaints from relatives of the murdered head of the police department, an appeal hearing of the criminal case will take place.

  The investigation regarded the incident as an accident; the court agreed with this interpretation in the verdict, which was handed down on September 29, 2023.

Although at first the investigation considered that there was a deliberate shot by Piklovsky. He was arrested. But then everything changed radically.


As a result of Piklovsky’s action, the investigation qualified it as causing death by negligence, despite the absurdity of his version. The court agreed with this interpretation of events - the perpetrator was given a suspended sentence of 1 year and 9 months of restricted freedom, that is, for now a completely symbolic punishment. Another probable accomplice in the murder, named Simonov, escaped punishment altogether. He remained a witness in the case.


The tragedy itself occurred last summer. Aksenov was wounded on the night of August 9-10, 2022, when he went to the hunting grounds with his acquaintances: Evgeny Piklovsky and Alexander Simonov. Aksenov was wounded and taken to a local hospital, where he died from a penetrating gunshot wound to the abdomen, complicated by the development of hemorrhagic shock.


Initially, Piklovsky and Simonov stated in their testimonies that Aksenov himself received a gunshot wound while uncovering his weapon in the car when both of his friends went to get water from the stream. But based on the results of examinations carried out as part of the criminal case, it turned out that Aksenov’s gunshot wound was caused by Piklovsky’s weapon.

Having learned about this, Piklovsky and Simonov completely changed the version of events. They began to claim that Piklovsky accidentally fired a shot at Aksenov.


At first, the investigation did not believe Piklovsky and Simonov. Moreover, they began to change their testimony at the same time, that is, they fully coordinated their actions.

Piklovsky was charged under Part 4 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code.

But the investigation completely ignored the conclusion of ballistics experts that gunpowder traces of the shot were found on Simonov’s clothes, and not on Piklovsky. And this directly indicated that the shot was fired by Simonov. And this already suggested an objective version of the murder planned by Simonov and Piklovsky.


But this was completely ignored by the investigation.

Moreover, the investigation then decided to believe Piklovsky’s version that he was in the car moving his weapon from the back seat of the car to the trunk. Allegedly, the trigger of the weapon caught on an unidentified object, a shot was fired and a bullet hit Aksenov standing next to him.

As a result, Piklovsky’s actions were finally qualified as causing death by negligence. He was then released from the pre-trial detention center.




In court, the victims insisted on the need to return the criminal case for additional investigation, since it was a planned murder.

Their position was more than justified.


Firstly, Piklovsky and Simonov, during the course of the investigation, became familiar with the results of investigative actions to verify their testimony (examinations, interrogations of experts), regularly coming up with new versions of the tragedy. And in agreement.


Secondly, according to the expert’s conclusion, traces of gunpowder were found on Simonov’s clothes. This can only mean that it was he who shot the victim. Although, according to Simonov’s testimony, he was standing 7 meters from the car when Piklovsky allegedly carelessly shot at Aksenov. All this directly points to the version of a planned murder. The investigation did not seem to notice this expert’s conclusion, and did not pursue the version of Simonov’s involvement in the murder.


Thirdly, Piklovsky deliberately delayed helping Aksenov. A helicopter was called very late. And what’s important: having reached the place where there was a connection, Piklovsky called not the police or the hospital, but his friend, the chief doctor of the district hospital, asking him not to report the incident anywhere yet! This is proven by the case materials, since Piklovsky’s conversation was heard by strangers.

By the way, a criminal case has now been opened in connection with the provision of inadequate medical care to the wounded Aksenov A. as a result of many complaints from relatives.


The sentence imposed on Piklovsky will not restore justice in any way, because everything indicates that a planned murder was covered up.


Roman Trushkin