Source: www.rucriminal.info
On July 12, the VKKS will consider the submission of the head of the TFR Alexander Bastyrkin to give consent to initiate a criminal case against the judge of the Moscow Arbitration Court Elena Kondrat on the grounds of a crime provided for in part 4 of article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ("Mediation in bribery on an especially large scale"). According to the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation and the FSB in Moscow and the region, Kondrat transferred $ 50,000 to her former assistant, and now also the judge of the LRA, Elena Makhlkina, for making the decision of the necessary businessman. A month ago, VKKS postponed the decision on Bastrykin's submission against Kondrat in connection with the judge's detailed objections. They ended up at the disposal of Rucriminal.info. From the document you can find out that, according to the operatives, Kondrat transferred money to Makhalkina for making a decision not to bring a number of individuals and legal entities to subsidiary liability, namely: United Standard LLC, its founders SI Soloveichik. and Shendrik V.G., accountant and financial director of LLC "USTS" Kostash O.A. and Pankova A.V., LLC "TransStroyMekhanizatsiya", as well as on bringing to subsidiary liability the former directors of LLC "USTS" Vershinin A.N., Seoev A.M., Laptev A.I., Pleskonos S.A. and Sakuna B.V.
Kondrat herself insists that she transferred money to the former assistant Makhalkina at her own request, since she did not have enough to buy an apartment and became a victim of a provocation. At the same time, Kondrat cited a recording of her conversation with Makhalkina, in which she admits that in 2020 the cattle were detained by the FSB while receiving money from the manager A.V. Goloshumova. ... In a personal conversation with Kondrat E.N. 04/27/2021 (recordings of the conversation are available), E.A. Makhalkina. said that she was caught red-handed, there are her fingerprints and for 10 years she must cooperate.
Already continuing to be under the control of the FSB, Makhalkina E.A. became a participant in an operational experiment in the case of the fixer Ullubiy Medzhidov. In December 2020, Majidov was detained.
Here is a fragment of the transcript of the recording with Makhalkina's confession: “For me, a criminal case / ten years, uh, for, this is the statute of limitations. Do you think there is no criminal case for me? /; There is a criminal case against me, against Golushumova. /And I.../; It’s the same for me, everything, I’m already everywhere under control. There is already a case for me, Elena Nikolaevna; Elena Nikolaevna, you just understand. Everything was already for me, / I told you right away / ”.
Rucriminal.info publishes the most interesting excerpts from Kondrat's objection to VKKS:
“The basis for making a procedural decision in accordance with Art. 448 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, according to the investigating authorities, are:
1. Statement by E.A. Makhalkina. from 13.10.2020;
2. Explanation by EA Makhalkina. from 13.10.2020;
3. Inspection protocol dated 18.03.2021 of the magazine "Arbitration Practice for Lawyers" issue No. 8, August 2019;
4. The protocol of the examination of March 25, 2021, an audio recording of the conversation Kondrat E.N. and Makhalkina E.A., recorded on a personal dictaphone last, held on 23.09.2020;
5. The protocol of the examination from 25.03.2021 of the audio recording of the conversation Kondrat E.N. and Makhalkina E.A., recorded on a personal dictaphone last held on 12.10.2020;
6. Explanation of the senior operational officer of the FSB of Russia for Moscow and the Moscow region;
7. "Operational experiment" dated 18.10.2020, as well as the protocol of examination dated 22.03.2021, video and audio recordings of conversations Kondrat E.N. and Makhalkina E.A. at the time of transfer of funds as part of an “operational experiment;
8. Explanations of S.Yu. Ponamarev. and Moshkova R.N., representatives of the public;
9. The protocol of the examination of March 22, 2021, the video recording of the detention on October 18, 2020, E.N. Kondrat. and Makhalkina E.A .;
Items inspection protocol dated 03/26/2021,
Protocol ORM "inspection of premises, buildings, structures, terrain and vehicles with the seizure of documents, items and materials" dated 10/18/2020
10. Report on the results of the operational - search action "operational experiment" dated 09.02.2021
However, from the information provided ... sufficient data does not follow, indicating both the signs of a crime and the event of the crime itself.
1. So, the information received by law enforcement agencies as a result of operational - search measures (paragraphs 6-10) testifies only to the fact of transfer of funds from Kondrat E.N. Makhalkina E.A., which no one denies, however, in connection with which the named funds were transferred, this information is not established. This information, except for the very fact of the transfer of funds, does not establish anything at all.
At the same time, the named funds were given from Kondrat E.N. Makhalkina E.A. really for the purpose of purchasing an apartment last ...
2. Information obtained from documents, audio recordings issued
Makhalkina E.A. law enforcement agencies also do not testify, both in part and in general, that the very event of the crime takes place, on the fact of which the investigating authorities turned submission to VKKS.
So, on June 7, 2021, the Act of the expert study of sound recording No.
2308 / 16-6-21, conducted by the FBU Russian Federal Forensic Center at
2.1. Is it possible, based on this Protocol 1 File 1, to conclude that E.N. told Makhalkina E.A. that she (Kondrat E.N.) was approached by persons who are ready to transfer funds in the amount of 50 thousand US dollars in the event that Makhalkina E.A. based on the results of consideration of the application of K.O. decisions not to bring to subsidiary liability a number of individuals and legal entities, namely: LLC "Ediny Standard", its founders Soloveichik S.I. and Shendrik V.G., accountant and financial director of LLC "USTS" Kostash O.A. and Pankova A.V., LLC "TransStroyMekhanizatsiya", as well as on bringing to subsidiary liability the former directors of LLC "USTS" Vershinin A.N., Seoev A.M., Laptev A.I., Pleskonos S.A. and Sakuna B.V. (hereinafter referred to as “the case of not being brought to subsidiary liability”)?
According to the expert's conclusions:
1.1. In the text of the verbatim content of the conversation between W1 and W2, presented in the expert examination report No. 2308 / 16-6-21 dated 06/07/2021, there is information provided from the words of W2 that a criminal case has been initiated against W2 (W2: On I have a criminal case / ten years, uh, for, this is the statute of limitations. Do you think there is no criminal case for me? /; For me there is a criminal case, for Golushumova. / And I ... /; For me, exactly But that's it, I'm already everywhere under control. There is already a case for me, Elena Nikolaevna; Elena Nikolaevna, you just understand. For me, everything was already there, / I told you right away /).
1.2. In the text of the verbatim content of the conversation between Zh1 and Zh2, presented in the act of expert research No. 2308 / 16-6-21 dated 06/07/2021, there is information submitted from the words of Zh2 that persons related to the same criminal case, there are a certain Goloshumova and a certain Ullubiy (Zh2): There is a criminal case against me, about Golushumova; No, it’s useless to argue right now, in the same way (Ullubiy) has been in jail for six months, he has a trial tomorrow; Goloshumova set me up; As soon as I (? Opera) was received with Goloshumova; And mine know that, yes, (unreasonable) the situation, but they say, we know that you are not involved, but another person (? Was there)).
1.3. In the text of the verbatim content of the conversation between Zh1 and Zh2, presented in the expert examination act No. 2308 / 16-6-21 dated 06/07/2021, there is information provided from the words of Zh2 that Zh2 is under control related to the criminal case under discussion (G2: For me it’s the same, everything, I’m already everywhere in control; Why should they (nrzb,) I’m just in control, as soon as what situation, I’ll be (nrzb.) , everything is).
Based on the above Expert Research Acts, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Makhalkina E.A. was under the control of law enforcement agencies in connection with the initiated criminal case, at least from May-June 2020, according to E.A. Makhalkina, who provided this information in a personal conversation with E.N. Kondrat. According to E.N. Kondrat, who received this information directly from E.A. Makhalkina. - at the bankruptcy manager Goloshumova A.The. there was a need to resolve the issue in the LRA and, Makhalkina E.A., promising to take some action, wanted to receive from A.V. Goloshumova. monetary reward. In the process of transferring money from Goloshumova A.The. Makhalkina E.A. in May-June 2020, the latter was detained by FSB officers. In a personal conversation with Kondrat E.N. 04/27/2021 (recordings of the conversation are available), E.A. Makhalkina. said that she was caught red-handed, there are her fingerprints and for 10 years she must cooperate.
2. Already continuing to be under control, EA Makhalkina. became a participant in an operational experiment in the case of Ullubiy Medzhidov. Based on the data obtained in open sources (attached) - in December 2020, while receiving a bribe from one of the judges of the Moscow Arbitration Court, a citizen of Dagestan, Majidov, was detained. "
To be continued
Arseny Dronov
Source: www.rucriminal.info
