On February 17, the presentation of Antonenko’s defense documents began in the so-called Sheremet case.
Due to the prosecutor’s delay, the court session lasted 1 hour. Three documents were examined: a description of facts presented by the defense to the ECHR, an inspection report of the page with the Ukrainian president’s speech, and a video of the Ministry of Internal Affairs briefing.
The first document is derivative evidence that reflects the chronology of pre-trial investigation events up until the disclosure of materials to the defense on 06/10/2020. Its English and Russian translations are available on our website.
The second document, as noted by attorney Kruhovyi, proves that during the briefing in summer 2019, almost six months before the suspects’ arrest, President Zelenskyy reviewed certain materials that enabled him to claim a quick result in the investigation. “From what I’ve seen… I think we’ll have a result… and the people who committed the murder will be found,” he stated. However, at that time, investigative actions regarding Mr. Antonenko and Ms. Kuzmenko had been suspended. Thus, Mr. Zelenskyy was aware of some other information, unknown to the jury, indicating the involvement of other individuals. On one hand, this is grounds for questioning President Zelenskyy in court; on the other, it proves that the version shown to the President was hidden from the jury.
The prosecutor stated that Mr. Zelenskyy cannot be summoned because he “was not a witness to Pavel Sheremet’s murder.” Recall that at the beginning of the trial, the prosecutor requested to summon , 40 of whom were also not eyewitnesses to the murder, and the remaining 220 know nothing about the case at all.
The third document — video and transcript of the Ministry of Internal Affairs briefing. This video shows the exact timing of the briefing events and live streaming of events in Mr. Antonenko’s courtyard. Dmytro Kruhovyi showed specific segments of the briefing that prove that
- during the briefing, obscene language was unnecessarily broadcast (Minister Avakov called it “obscene”) to discredit the defendants
- Minister Avakov announced at 17:10 that the individuals were detained while simultaneously streaming Mr. Antonenko’s courtyard filled with armed police officers. However, the prosecutor in court claimed that the arrest took place at 23:05
- General Koval announced that the investigation “discovered” all suspects through 2 other crimes — the bombing of power lines in Kherson region and the attempted car bombing of citizen Chekurak in Ivano-Frankivsk region. However, the jury knows nothing about these 2 cases from the prosecution, and Antonenko is not involved in them. This indicates that the investigation was already on the wrong track at that time
- General Koval made false statements at the briefing claiming that the explosive devices in the Sheremet case and the Chekurak (Hryshchenko) case were almost identical, but the poster from the prosecutor’s opening statement shows they differ in absolutely all characteristics
- General Koval provided false and manipulative information that contradicts the court-examined materials regarding Antonenko’s residence near the crime scene, his limping, and the atypical nature of phone connections between Antonenko and Kuzmenko on the night of the murder, about the similarity of logos on Antonenko’s clothes with those of the alleged perpetrator
- The minister and general made a false announcement that the investigation has a much larger volume of evidence than was disclosed.
“They poured out a heap of lies on air, immediately formulated and prepared public opinion that these individuals committed a terrible crime… Top state officials – the president, minister of internal affairs, Prosecutor General, and a few days later – the parliament chairman thanked the police for this action. They stated a huge amount of false information that was never officially refuted,” Dmytro Kruhovyi summarized.
“This is the formation of public opinion and, possibly, subsequent pressure on the court, when they say they have very many pieces of evidence and these particular individuals are guilty based on this evidence, but then they don’t provide this evidence,” added Stanislav Kulyk.
The briefing (with Ukrainian, English and Russian subtitles) can be viewed here
The first two volumes of Antonenko’s defense evidence and a copy of his social media page data can be viewed in full at this link.
The next hearing will take place on Monday, February 21. The court hearing calendar can be .