среда, 21 сентября 2011 г.

Shantsev of Nizhny is hiding Chaika’s son, involved in crime

http://rumafia.com/material.php?id=393

Russia's Prosecutor General Yury Chaika is hiding his son Artem, who is involved in the major illegal gambling case, in Nizhny Novgorod. The investigation into a chain of underground casinos in the Moscow Region is led by the FSB and state Investigative Committee. The investigators believe state prosecutors provided protection to the gambling spots. For the period of investigation, the Prosecutor General asked his close friend governor Valery Shantsev of Nizhny Novgorod to take care of Artem until the whole thing is over.


When the news reached Yury Chaika, that witnesses had given incriminating evidence against his son Artem, his first step was to send Artem abroad, a source told Rumafia. His son's escape was very timely. The Moscow Region branch of the Investigative Committee summoned Artem for questioning, the summons signed by Irina Guminyuk. When Dmitry Medvedev invited both Yury Chaika and Aleksandr Bastrykin, head of the Investigative Committee, to the Kremlin for reconciliation, the prosecutors recalled the summons. Medvedev called for Bastrykin to stop making public the details of the illegal gambling case and not touch on members of the families of the high-profile officials. His wish was only half-fulfilled. The media still pays attention to the major case, but investigators stopped mentioning Artem Chaika in their public comments.


It was not appropriate for the Prosecutor General to hide his son abroad, taking in consideration that the FSB was fully aware of the situation. Chaika brought Artem back to Russia. However to keep Artem in Moscow, at the very centre of scandal, was too dangerous. According to the source of Rumafia, Yury Chaika had a private conversation with his old friend Valery Shantsev, former vice mayor of Moscow and head of the Nizhny Novgorod region.


The Prosecutor General complained to the governor about Artem's problems. Artem was being got at, Chaika said, and it was not safe for him to stay in Moscow. Yury Chaika decided to send his son to Nizhny Novgorod, a calm city on the Volga, where Artem Chaika had some business interests. Artem had to wait until the gambling scandal was over. Chaika asked Shantsev to take care of his offspring, and safeguard him from the police agents and investigators. Shantsev helped his old friend out and promised his son would feel secure and expand his business in Nizgny Novgorod.


Artem Chaika has always been a pain in the neck, giving his father hard time throughout his career. The first scandal surrounding the young man hit the Moscow region in March 1999, when a Kalinichenko and Kashirin, representatives of the company called Formpost, reported to the police that racketeers attempted to extort $60,000. Two suspects were detained - Syzyr Chumakov and Ibragim Yevloyev, both natives of Ingushetiya. On them the police found 0.002 grammes of heroin, a revolver, and a RGD-5 hand grenade with a primer. What surprised the investigators was the culprits' car. The car had registration plate 0-682-00 99, this serial number designating a high-profile official. On the windscreen of the car there was a driving pass, signed by the road police, which substituted a driving licence and saved the bearer of it, if pulled over by the police, from examination of the car. The document number 018027 was issued on 18 January 1999. The culprits also had a permit to enter state dacha called Sosny and a permit to use parking area near the building of the State Duma.


When the investigators found out who was the owner of the car they were even more surprised. The car belonged to Artem Yurievich Chaika, son of then deputy Prosecutor General Yury Chaika. Ibragim Yevloyev told the police that Artem was his friend and allowed him to take his car. Yevloyev produced a document, proving he was driving the car by warrant. Artem Chaika worked as an ordinary lawyer for Chaadayev and Partners law firm. It took time and effort for Yury Chaika to hush up the scandal.


When Yury Chaika was a justice minister, his son surprised him once more. He got involved in the corporate raiding, together with member of the parliament Bashir Kodzoyev, who represents Ingushetiya. They were reported to take over Upper Lena Steamboat Lines. When Yury Chaika was promoted to the Prosecutor General, his son took over another enterprise - Tyretsky Salt Deposit JSC, fourth largest manufacturer of salt in Russia.


Artem Chaika is linked to the Moscow prosecutors, accused of providing protection to the chain of illegal casinos, according to the statement of a witness. It was not dirty money that attracted Artem. He used prosecutors to take control of the most profitable municipal enterprises. Prosecutors opened criminal investigations into the heads of these enterprises, and then filled the vacant places with Chaika's people. The witness gave evidence about the situation surrounding municipal enterprise called Serpukhov Natural Resources. The document is signed by a Nikolayev, although his real name is Stanislav Buyanovsky. Buyanovsky was a deputy chief prosecutor of the Moscow region.


Below is his statement. In Russian legal system the document is literally called "interrogation protocol". It summarizes the evidence the witness gave during the pre-trail questioning. This evidence is used in court.



Witness Statement



I had been informed that in the process of interrogation the interrogator used the following technical devices: HP printer and HP laptop.


Prior to the interrogation I was informed about my rights and responsibilities as a witness, specified by Article 56.4 of the RF Criminal Code:


1)Right not to give evidence against myself, my spouse and members of my close family, specified by Article 5.4 of the RF Criminal Code. I was informed that anything I said might be used as evidence in the criminal case, even if later I disclaim my testimony.


2)Right to give evidence in my mother tongue;


3)Right to request the services of interpreter for free;


4)Right to change the interpreter in the process of interrogation;


5)Right to file motions and complaints about actions and decisions of interrogator, investigator, prosecutor and judges;


6)Right to be interrogated in the presence of my lawyer in accordance with Article 189.5 of the RF Criminal Code;


7)Right to file motion to protect me as a witness in accordance with Article 11.3 of the RF Criminal Code.


I am fully aware of the criminal liability, specified by Articles 208 and 307 of the RF Criminal Code, for refusal to give evidence or giving false evidence.


Witness __________________ ________________________


(Signature) (Full Name)



I can say the following about the essence of the criminal case.


I confirm that the statements I made during the interrogation on 4 March 2011 are fully correct. I feel well and I am ready to give evidence. Since the previous interrogation I have not been subjected to any physical or psychological pressure. I confirm that my evidence is voluntary and I testify without compulsion.


Firstly I want to carry on speaking about the events of 2009, which pertains to Shestun, the head of Serpukhov municipal district in Moscow Region.


In 2009 Serpukhov city prosecutors opened a probe into the director of municipal enterprise called Energoservis and the head of municipal district on charges of premeditated bankruptcy of Energoservis.


I learned about this probe from Urumov in August 2009. Two weeks later I received information that the investigation had been continued by the investigative directorate of the investigative committee of Moscow Region Chief Prosecutor’s office. The investigators opened an inquiry under Articles 144-145 of the RF Criminal Code. Urumov and Ignatenko told me that the main goal of the probes into A.V. Shestun and the director of Energoservis was to force Serpukhov municipal council to appoint an Urumov and Ignatenko's front man as head of a municipal enterprise called Serpukhov Mineral Resources. I asked Urumov and Ignatenko why they wanted to have their own man on the post of director. They told me that the construction of a new Moscow ring road was due to begin in Moscow Region. There would be a growing demand for sand and crushed stone, which Serpukhov Mineral Resources produced. Ignatenko and Urumov were linked to Katsyv, transport minister of Moscow Region. Through him they planned to get contracts for supplying the building works with sand and crushed stone. As far as I know, Ignatenko himself ordered O.A. Bazylyan, prosecutor of Serpukhov, <…> [to open] probes into the director of Energoservis and head of the municipal district A.V. Shestunov. I know that Buyansky, deputy prosecutor of Moscow Region, was responsible for supervising the probe, carried out by the investigative directorate of the investigative committee of Moscow Region Chief Prosecutor’s office. Buyansky demanded that the investigative committee should open a criminal case against head of the municipal district A.V. Shestun and the director of Energoservis. Buyansky himself approached head of the investigative directorate A.G. Markov, inducing him to initiate criminal proceedings on the grounds that actions of the director of Energoservis and head of the municipal district A.V. Shestun were criminal. Pushing Markov to open the criminal proceedings, Buyansky followed the orders of Ignatenko. I heard Urumov and Ignatenko talk about getting additional 2 million US dollars from Shestun. It happened late in August 2009, during a corporate event in the restaurant called Uzbekistan, near Moscow Region Chief Prosecutor’s Office. As far as I remember, we were invited to meet Buyansky, the newly appointed deputy chief prosecutor of Moscow Region. Urumov and Ignatenko agreed on the idea to extort 2 million US dollars. Ignatenko asked Urumov to order Nazarov to continue talks with Shestun. They promised to stop probes and investigations against Shestun, both by Serpukhov city prosecutors and the investigative committee of Moscow Region chief prosecutor, if he paid the aforesaid amount of money. I heard that the so-called confidant of theirs whom they planned to promote to the post of Serpukhov Mineral Resources director was Andrei Chaika's man. I understood from the conversation between Urumov and Ignatenko that the idea to extort 2 million US dollars had not come at once. Their key goal was to have their own man in Serpukhov Natural Resources municipal enterprise, whereas the idea to extort 2 million US dollars appeared while they discussed ways to promote their candidate. It was Urumov's idea, but Ignatenko fully supported it. Through Urumov Ignatenko controlled Nazarov when he extorted Shestun.


Interrogator: Besides Urumov and Ignatenko, who else was present at the event?


As far as I remember, besides people whom I have already mentioned, the following people were present: Buyansky, newly appointed deputy chief prosecutor of Moscow Region; prosecutors Ye.I. Puzanov, R.I. Nishchemenko, R.A. Rezumenko, O.A. Bazylyan, V.P. Glebov, E.Yu. Kalun, M.V. Popkov, and P.S. Sedoikin. I do not remember other people who could have heard that conversation.


Interrogator: How did the situation surrounding Shestun develop?


I talked with Nazarov about Shestun. He told me that he came to Shestun and extorted 2 million US dollars at the instance of Urumov and Ignatenko. Shestun was surprised because he had thought that Urumov and Ignatenko wanted him to appoint their confidant to the post of the director of Serpukhov Natural Resources, which alone could bring them considerable profit. Nazarov told me that Urumov and he held talks with Shestun in sauna. Nazarov made fun of Shestun, telling him that they were afraid that Shestun would record their conversation and proposed to talk about the bribe when they took a steam bath. Urumov and Nazarov discussed with Shestun the details of bribe in restaurants.


Later on I heard on the news, that Abrosimov, deputy head of the main directorate of the Prosecutor General's Office for Southern Federal District, was arrested for accepting 5 million roubles as a bribe from Shestun.


They did not manage to get their money from Shestun. Abrosimov's case frightened them, because Urumov and Ignatenko understood that Shestun could report to the police about the extortion and situation surrounding Serpukhov Natural Resources. Indeed Shestun reported abovementioned situation to the Investigative Committee for the Central Federal District. I also learned that a few days after Abrosimov's arrest the agents of economic security department of the interior ministry detained Elena Bazanova, deputy to Shestunov, for accepting a bribe. As far as I know, regional prosecutors did their best to take her into custody. Ignatenko and Urumov used Bazanova's case to intimidate Shestun after he reported the attempted extortion.


After Shestunov reported to the police, they opened an inquiry into Urumov and Nazarov. Urumov and Nazarov asked Ignetenko and Buyansky to advise them on how to escape legal prosecution and mislead the police. Nazarov and Buyansky found understanding in the Prosecutor General’s office. I do not know the person who helped them. But it turned out that prosecutors did not open criminal proceedings against Urumov, because he had special status, whereas Nazarov could not escape prosecution, because his actions were criminal. Nazarov was advised to go abroad. Prosecutor General’s office insiders consulted him on how to mislead the police. When Nazarov was abroad, Ignatenko, Buyanov and Urumov actively consulted him through Skype application. He knew about the inquiry into his affairs from Sudakov (Nikulin). Sudakov was former officer of Federal Customs Service, Federal Drug Control Service and Moscow region police. Sudakov introduced himself as a top aide to the chief of Moscow region police, N.V. Golovkin. Officers of Moscow region police, including heads of all police units, obeyed his orders. Although he was not a police officer, he held meetings with other officers both in their offices and in his own office that was next door to that of the chief of Moscow region police. Sudakov (Nikulin)’s group used his connections in the police of the region and in other security forces in order to gather information and to intercept talks of Nazarov’s competitors and competitors of this group. When Nazarov left Russia, I.S. Volkov was in charge of his business, including illegal gambling.


I have heard on the news, that prosecutors dropped the inquiry into Nazarov and Urumov, because of the lack of crime. They found out that Shestun’s statements were ungrounded. I know that Ignatenko and Urumov lobbied the Prosecutor General’s office and obtained the circumstances they wished for, so that the case was dropped.


Interrogator: Do you know the associates of Urumov and Ignatenko in the Economic Security Department of the interior ministry?


Sudakov’s group and Nazarov worked with Dmitry Sevastyanov, who headed a unit in the Economic Security Dep. Their intermediaries were Ignatenko and Urumov. Urumov was in touch with Sevastyanov. Ignatenko detailed the issues Urumov had to discuss with Sevastyanov.


Through his connections in the Moscow Region police Sudakov (Nikulin) organised supervision over businessman P. Zaitsev. Besides watching him, the police officers bugged his telephone. Sudakov conspired with Ignatenko and Urumov. These two asked him to watch Zaitsev. After Zaitsev met Nazarov in McDonald’s in Yaroslavskoye Highway, the police officers carried out supervision over him in the field. Ignatenko, Urumov and Nazarov suspected Zaitsev of reporting their illegal gambling business to the police. They were afraid that Zaitsev could tell about the protection they gave to illegal casinos.


Besides Sevastyanov, I can name F.A. Temirgaliyev and M.A.-Ogly Abbasov, who changed his name to Mikhail Aleksandrovich Kulakov, both officers of cyber technology unit of the interior ministry. I saw them at the birthday party of Urumov’s daughter in Uzbekistan restaurant, situated near the building of the Moscow Region Chief Prosecutor’s Office. Temirgaliev and Abbasov followed Urumov’s orders and opened investigations into the affairs of Nazarov’s competitors. Urumov, then, used the evidence, gathered by the investigators, to open criminal cases against businessmen. He extorted money from the business owners or took away their business. Temirgaliyev and Abbasov provided illegal gambling spots with protection. These spots were investigated by the investigative department of the UVD no.6 for Moscow. Temirgaliev and Abbasov’s connections were head of the department Korolev-Slivinsky, officers of the investigative department of the UVD no.2 for the Moscow Region and deputy head of the main investigative department of the UVD for the Moscow Region Gorodkov. I do not know how much they got from the businessmen.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the situation surrounding the land plot that was allocated to a non-commercial partnership called Silans.


I have already spoken about that. If I am not mistaken, A.M. Ignatenko was a prosecutor of Krasnogorsk city in the Moscow Region in 2007. He asked the economic crime prevention unit of the UVD for Krasnogorsk district of the Moscow Region to open investigation into the affairs of the municipal authorities. This investigation was real pain in the neck of Rasskazov and Karaulov, members of the municipal council. Ignatenko wanted to gather evidence against them, so that he could blackmail them. Ignatenko wanted to have land plots in the Krasnogorsk district for himself and his people. Indeed, soon head of Krasnogorsk municipal council Rasskazov and his deputy Karaulov approached Ignatenko, asking him to stop the investigation. Ignatenko was ready to help, but he laid the following condition before Rasskalov and Karaulov: they had to grant non-commercial partnership called Silans the right to rent 24 thousand square metres of land at the knockdown price. A.N. Ignatenko was the founder of this so-called partnership. Rasskalov and Karaulov fulfilled Ignatenko’s demands. After Silans got the land plot they aked for, Ignatenko began to build cottages. In February 2009 Ignatenko was appointed first deputy chief prosecutor of the Moscow Region. His protégé Puzanov took the office of Krasnogorsk prosecutor. Puzanov was Ignatenko’s deputy and he assisted his superior when he extorted the bribe in the form of the land plot. Later on <…> After Ignatenko’s promotion, Puzanov distributed the land for Ignatenko’s people. Doing that, Puzanov followed Ignatenko’s orders. I.V. Nazarov paid for the building works with his own money. Cottages in this village belong to A.M. Mokhov, A.N. Ignatenko, Popkov, Puzanov, deputy chairman of the Court of the Moscow Region Gavrichkov, head of the recruitment department of the Prosecutor General’s Office Makarov. Ignatenko sold a piece of land to the third party. Who are these people I do not know. Silans just rents the land. I do not know the mechanism how Ignatenko sold it. 100 square metres cost 30,000 US dollars.


A.N. Ignatenko distributed land among the prosecutors, his protégés and those involved in hushing up the illegal gambling chain of I.V. Nazarenko.


I do not know whether Ignatenko had the permission to execute building works. When the cottages were completed and registered, Ignatenko and other owners of the cottages planned to get the land into their ownership. Urumov told me, that Ignatenko had discussed the details of this with Rasskazov. He threatened Rasskazov, saying if he did not cooperate with Ignatenko or raised difficulties, Ignatenko would open an investigation into Rasskazov’s affairs.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 14, Moskovskaya Street, Khimki, Moscow region.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov, as there had always been a problem with the prosecutor. Ignatenko could not find anyone appropriate for the position of Khimky city prosecutor, that is a person who would know about illegal activities of the club and be involved in them. Thus, it was Urumov who controlled gambling in the city. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Urumov about the inspection. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid Urumov 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 66, Tretiego Internatsionala Street,Noginsk.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by V. P. Glebov, Noginsk city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov through Volkov contacted Glebov, whom he informed about the problem. After that during general meetings Glebov instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Glebov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Glebov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid Glebov 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 19, Vokzalnaya Ploshchad Street, Orekhovo-Zuevo.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov, as Pantyashin, the former prosecutor of the district, was not on the team and was fired, as I presume, due to the fact that he would not cooperate regarding providing protection for the gaming industry. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted Urumov, whom they informed about the problem. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 1, Snezhsky Prospects, Solnechnogorsk.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted Urumov, whom they informed about the problem. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 13, Mozhaiskaya Street, Odintsovo.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by R.I. Nishchemenko, Odintsovo city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov contacted R.I. Nishchemenko, whom he informed about the problem. After that during general meetings R.I. Nishchemenko instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, R.I. Nishchemenko ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, R.I. Nishchemenko prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid R.I. Nishchemenko 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address:1, Sovetsky Pereulok, Ozery.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Drok, Ozery city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov contacted Drok, whom he informed about the problem. After that during general meetings Drok instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Drok ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Drok prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid Drok 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 43, Pervaya Zheleznodorozhnaya Street, Mozhaisk.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted Urumov, whom they informed about the problem. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about the gambling club, located at the address: 18-a, Sovetskaya Ploshchad, Klin.


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by V.I. Kalpun, Klin city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov contacted V.I. Kalpun, whom he informed about the problem. After that during general meetings V.I. Kalpun instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, V.I. Kalpun ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, V.I. Kalpun prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid V.I. Kalpun 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about gambling clubs, located at: 5, Pervy Delovoy Proezd, Podolsk; 3-v, B.Serpukhovskaya Street, Podolsk; and 18/1, B.Serpukhovskaya Street, apt. 17, Podolsk


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Lukianenko, Podolsk city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov contacted Lukianenko, whom he informed about the problem. After that during general meetings Lukianenko instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Lukianenko ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Lukianenko prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid Lukianenko 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about gambling clubs, located at the address: 48/5, Tchaikovskogo Street, Stupino


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted Urumov, whom they informed about the problem. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about gambling clubs, located at the address: 5, Vokzalnaya Street, Pushkino


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by R.A. Razumenko, Pushkino city prosecutor. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted R.A. Razumenko, whom they informed about the problem. After that during general meetings R.A. Razumenko instructed officers of relevant authorities as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, R.A. Razumenko ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, R.A. Razumenko prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


As a toll for above-mentioned protection I.V. Nazarov monthly paid R.A. Razumenko 30,000 US dollars.


Interrogator: Tell me what you know about gambling clubs, located at:19/22, Pervaya Rabnaya Street, Sergievo-Posad; 218, Prospekt Krasnoy Armii, apr.18, Sergievo-Posad; 27, Ordzhonikidze Street, apt.8, Sergievo-Posad


I know that the owner of the gaming club is I.V. Nazarov and that until February 2011 the club was engaged in illegal gambling. The club was controlled personally by Urumov. When authorities intended to carry out an inspection of the premises or at the time of such an inspection club staff got in touch with Volkov, and he in his turn informed Nazarov about the inspection. Then Nazarov or Volkov contacted Urumov, whom they informed about the problem. After that Urumov instructed officers of the corresponding prosecutor’s office department that oversaw gambling and authorities regulating it as to the favourable inspection results concerning the controlled gaming facilities. If for some reason slot machines were confiscated by the authorities, Urumov ordered to give the equipment over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody. When all necessary documents for safe custody were signed, slot machines were reinstalled and were again used for gaming. Furthermore, Urumov prompted inspections in gambling clubs of I.V. Nazarov’s competitors. The inspections resulted in confiscation of slot machines, or the clubs being closed down and slot machines being handed over to I.V. Nazarov for safe custody, which in reality he used fro gaining proceeds from gaming.


Interrogator: What other objects of interest of Moscow region prosecutor’s office staff do you know?


As far as I know, in 2010 Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation instructed G.B. Lopatin, head of executive office of the Prosecutor General’s Office, to bring land plots adjoining premises of Iskra sanatorium under the ownership of the prosecutor’s office. The sanatorium is located in Istrinsky district in Moscow region and is only for Prosecutor Generals Office members of the staff. Actions aimed at changing the ownership of the land plots revealed that Istrinsky district authorities had given ownership of the mentioned land to third parties. Prosecutor’s office initiated an inquiry into actions of Sherba, head of Istrinsky district, on the grounds including fraud by head of Istrinsky district in transferring land plots adjoining Iskra sanatorium for Prosecutor Generals Office members of the staff under the ownership of Kipina, an affiliated person and a trustee of Sherba. Moscow region GUVD performed operational escorting of the inquiry procedures. Sudakov (Nikulin) and N.V. Mikhevich supervised the inquiry by the prosecutor’s office staff. The inquiry resulted in the initiation of several criminal cases.


I also know that prior to the establishment of the investigative committee, Moscow region prosecutor’s office investigated a criminal case instituted over divestiture of land owned by Leninsky Luch collective farm. The case was investigated by Monakov and supervised by personally Zamurayev and Mokhov, Moscow region prosecutors, who then reported personally to Sidneyev, an employee of the Prosecutor General’s Office. There were no meetings held to discuss the investigation. Moscow region prosecutor barred any third party information requests concerning the investigation. Zolotarev, head of the collective farm, was arrested and convicted. The trial was supervised by Ignatenko. The case was a frame-up.


Interrogator: What do you know as to informal and illegal ties between Moscow region prosecutor’s office staff and the civilians?


I know that Moscow region prosecutor’s office staff communicates with D.O. Yakubovsky, an entrepreneur. As far as I know, D.O. Yakubovsky kept in touch with Buyansky, deputy prosecutor of Moscow region. But then there was a conflict between them and Yakubovsky developed connection with R.I. Nishchemenko, Odintsovo city prosecutor. Furthermore, I am aware that there are friendly relations between D.P. Ponaitov, head of investigative department in Odintsovo, and Yakubovsky who he has now been friends for over 10 years. I saw D.P. Ponaitov enter during his working hours the office of Yakubovsky in Gorky-8 in Moscow region. Thus, I know that relations between Ponaitov and Yakubovsky developed to the point where Ponaitov in full obedience followed all instructions of Yakubovsky concerning termination and initiation of criminal cases against third parties. Thanking Ponaitov for such favours, Rover in 2010 Yakubovsky gave him a Range Rover as a present. According to the paperwork, the owner of the vehicle is Ponaitov’s mother.


During the interrogation the witness demanded that the questioning be suspended until next day due to the fact that he was tired and needed some rest.


Interrogator: Do you confirm that your evidence is voluntary?


Yes, I confirm that my evidence is voluntary and I testify without compulsion. During the investigation and prior to it interrogation I have not been subjected to any physical or psychological pressure.


Interrogator: Do you have grounds for false accusations of Nazarov, Ignatenko, Mokhov, Urumov and other people mentioned by you during the interrogation?


I do not. I have never been involved in conflicts with the abovementioned people. I once again confirm that my evidence is voluntary and I testify without compulsion by law enforcement officers or other persons.


Witness _____________

Thomas Petrov, Alexey Gordon, Rumafia.com

Комментариев нет:

Отправить комментарий