On June 1, the Shevchenkivskyi Court held another hearing in the case concerning the murder of Pavlo Sheremet.
Oksana Melnyk, representative of the victims, who had previously filed a motion to recuse the entire jury, did not appear at the hearing.
The defense of Andriy Antonenko requested that the court change the preventive measure from round-the-clock arrest to personal obligation, citing that his wife finds it extremely difficult to support the children on her own while the judicial investigation is ongoing, but the court denied the motion and ruled to leave unchanged the Court’s decision to keep Antonenko under round-the-clock house arrest.
At the hearing, the examination of volume 11 of evidence in the case was completed and volume 12 was partially examined. During the proceedings, the prosecutor presented a series of “interesting evidence.” In his opinion, the absence of a tattoo on the arm of the female scout in the video does not prove Yana Dugar’s innocence, as it can simply be concealed. The logic of such an explanation is, to put it mildly, strange, since the woman in the video did not hide her face from the camera lens.
The prosecutor also presented to the court a joint photograph of Yana Dugar and Inna Hryshchenko—the latter, allegedly, “is accused in another case.” However, in fact, Hryshchenko is not accused, which violates Article 62 of the Constitution, as well as Article 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which strictly prohibits the use of information about criminal records and other characterizing circumstances as evidence, let alone compromising material on friends and acquaintances.
The prosecutor also presented as “evidence” a protocol of examination of Yana Dugar’s mobile phone, which, however, contained recordings of conversations between attorneys in another case. The prosecutor was unable to explain what these conversations prove.
https://www.facebook.com/t.bezpalyy/posts/10218512118058990
A true surprise was the “ruling on temporary access to items and documents by overcoming logical protection systems.” By this decision, Judge Pysanets authorized an undefined circle of persons… to hack Apple Inc. servers! Investigator Byrko, experts, specialists, and… other persons. So far, no one in the world has succeeded in this, but we believe in investigator Byrko!
So far, no one in the world has succeeded in this, but we believe in investigator Byrko!
There was also evidence tampering, which prosecutor Tishyn was caught doing. During the examination of volume 10, the prosecutor presented only the protocol of examination of the disk, but not the disk itself. To the logical question about the availability of the disk, the prosecutor replied that it is not currently available, but it will certainly be present during the examination of volume 12 of evidence, which, however, turned out to be false, as there is in fact no such disk in volume 12.