Translated from mixed Russian and Ukrainian content
For original TV show record see this link. Version with subtitles may be watched on our Youtube channel
Click, please, the text header to jump to a section or the disk 💿 to watch the video timecode
- Opening speech by Savik Shuster 💿
- Case presentation 💿
- Address by Minister Avakov 💿
- about the difficulties of the investigation: the bomb exploded and left no traces 💿
- various versions: we took a fairly wide version of destabilization as a basic one 💿
- a story about the Grishchenkos family: they found traces of DNA on a mine that “practically looks like” the one that “did not leave any traces” 💿
- minister talks about his personal participation in the investigation: he and others “drew schemas” 💿
- a story about the blowing up of electrical pylons in Crimea 💿
- presentation of the version about the alleged disappearance of intruders and an overnight stay at Antonenko’s house 💿
- a story about the unexpected results of the examination: the expert’s opinion must be “laid down” in the basis of the accusation 💿
- a story about the appearance of Birch: he flew in with his opinion 💿
- lies about phones that “didn’t answer” 💿
- about Antonenko’s lameness: “in this video he drags his leg a little” 💿
- various other considerations and reasons for the arrest 💿
- lies about the MON-50 mine: part of the TNT was removed from it 💿
- Break 💿
- Resume transmission 💿
- Sevgil Musaeva’s speech 💿
- Minister’s answer to the question about the organizers 💿
- Minister’s answer to the question about obstruction of the investigation 💿
- Minister’s answer to the question about the change of leadership and about “help” from the prosecutor’s office 💿
- Minister’s answer to the question about the absence of motive. “What motive? This is schizophrenia, pure water, this is some inadequacy “ 💿
- Speech by Editor-in-Chief “Censor.net” Yuri Butusov 💿
- Minister Avakov declares permission to arrest as confirmation of suspicion and extra-procedural influence on the judge: “we presented the court with a more complete amount of information, they made a decision” 💿
- Minister Avakov answers the question about the lack of direct evidence: “we need to work on their life in more detail, but they refuse to testify” 💿
- Dmitry Gordon’s speech: I was guarded by the SBU with dogs 💿
- Question from Alexander Martynenko 💿
- Question from Irina Gerashchenko 💿
- Speech by David Sakvarelidze 💿
- Studio public vote on the validity of the suspicion 💿
- Speech by Alexander Ruvin. “Our results did not coincide with what the investigation had hoped, because we did not confirm either Grishchenko or Kiyan, that they were at that time, we had to invite this our specialist and our colleague from England” 💿
Opening speech by Savik Shuster 💿
[Savik Shuster:] The murder of Pavel Sheremet … I don’t know, many probably remember that. I just understand that the people who are in our studio … We asked before the program, 85% of people did not see yesterday’s press conference. Therefore, I would suggest this: let us still give people the information that … well, that is necessary.
Case presentation 💿
[Voiceover, in Ukrainian:] On July 20, 2016, journalist Pavel Sheremet was killed. His car exploded at 7:43 am in the center of Kiev. Subsequently, law enforcement officers showed a video, which shows that at night a woman and a man planted explosives under the car.
For 3 years, the police have analyzed 35 different crimes where explosives were used. Two of them attracted attention: First. In the fall of 2015, in the Kherson region, near the village of Chaplynka, 2 explosions damaged the pylons of power lines. From the scene of the explosion, the investigation has a photo from the back of a man dressed in a black jacket with the symbols of a heavy metal band. A man in clothes with a similar print planted explosives under Sheremet’s car in 2016.
The investigation believes that this is Andriy Antonenko, pseudo “Riffmaster”. Andriy Antonenko, 48 years old, from Kiev. Musician, soldier, sergeant of the Special Operations Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. In 2003 he founded his own author’s project group “Riffmaster”. From the first days of the war in Donbass, he helped the military as a volunteer. In 2017 he joined the Special Forces. His author’s song “Quietly Came, Quietly Gone” is considered the anthem of the Special Operations Forces. The links proving Antonenko’s involvement, according to the police, are the residence of Riffmaster at that time, near Pavel Sheremet’s house, limping and the fact that he wears clothes similar to the murderer of the journalist.
In addition, the investigation was interested in two of Antonenko’s acquaintances – the pediatric surgeon Yulia Kuzmenko and citizen K. pseudo “Electrician”. Kuzmenko was also announced suspicion by policemen Yulia Kuzmenko, 40 years old, originally from the Donetsk region, the city of Bakhmut, a cardiovascular surgeon of the highest qualification category, Ph.D. of medical sciences. Since 2006, head of the department at the Center for Pediatric Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery in Kiev. Operates on children with congenital heart defects. In 2014, she was a volunteer doctor during the Euromaidan, and later continued her volunteer work in eastern Ukraine. Raises a 13-year-old son. Kuzmenko and “Electrician” lived together, had mutual friends, the woman volunteered, her husband served in the combat zone.
In one of the joint photos, investigators saw volunteer Yana Duhar next to Yulia Kuzmenko, the third suspect in the Sheremet case.
Yana Duhar, 26 years old, originally from the Poltava region. Junior sergeant, nurse of one of the paratrooper battalions of the 25th separate airborne brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. With the outbreak of war in the east, Yana worked as a military nurse in the 66th Mobile Military Hospital, for several years helping the wounded on the line of combat. Chevalier of the Order “For Courage” 3rd degree, she was awarded various awards, including the badge “Badge of Honor” from the Minister of Defense of Ukraine. The second crime that attracted the attention of law enforcement officers was the attempt on the life of a businessman in the summer of 2018, in the city of Kosiv, Ivano-Frankivsk region. The killers used an improvised explosive device, almost identical to the one that killed Pavel Sheremet. The investigators identified the car in which they were driving to plant explosives and the person who rented it. It was Ivan Vakulenko, pseudo “Pistol”. The suspects in the assassination attempt are the spouses Grishchenko, Inna, pseudo “Puma”, and Vladislav, nicknamed “Bucha”. Inna and Vladislav Grishchenko – spouses, known by their call signs “Puma” and “Bucha”, Right Sector combatants. Inna from a military family, before the war worked in the pre-trial detention center and in the prison colony Buchansky In the ATO she was head of the operations department of counter-intelligence of Right Sector. Vladislav was a “cyborg” [common term from enemies for extreme courage] of the 95th airmobile brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, defended the Donetsk airport. They got married at the front. In 2015, Inna was wounded near Shyrokyne, returned to Kiev and worked in the Veterano Group pizzeria, where they provide work for ATO veterans. Vladislav fought in the ATO. Had been repeatedly convicted. Now the spouses are in jail. Vakulenko drove Grishchenko from Kiev to Kosiv. The police found the DNA of the Grishchenko family on an explosive device. After discovering the crime in the Carpathian region, the police began to wiretap all the defendants and called Vakulenko for interrogation now due to the Sheremet case Ivan Vakulenko’s friends started to get nervous
[Inna Grishchenko, “Puma”:] – On Monday … this witness who is Vanya, is summoned here in our Kiev, to the police council … [Mrs. P .:] – Yes, I know … He told me he told me about Sheremet, a witness … Baby, he is still our headache and we follow him … We must … take care of him like the apple of an eye , including God forbid, did not get there so that God forbid he was not rolled out there … understand?
The day after the summons, Ivan Vakulenko shot himself with a hunting rifle. There are two connections with the Sheremet case: the mechanism of explosives and the acquaintances of the defendants with each other. Thus, according to the investigation, a group of six people was formed, one of whom is no longer alive. This unit was radically inclined and prepared terrorist attacks in Kiev and further destabilization.
[Yulia Kuzmenko, “Fox”:] – And they will do the right thing. I really want this to happen, this Kiev is not a complaint to me at all. – To bring Kiev back to normal, it is necessary to release 4-5 GRAD cassettes to Kiev and that’s it. – Oh, Kiev is so moody that half a cassette is enough here.
Roles that the suspects played in the murder of Sheremet. Yana Duhar, a medic of the 25th brigade: according to the investigation, she looks like a woman scout who several times, on different days, photographed surveillance cameras installed along the route of the explosives planters. Pediatric surgeon Julia Kuzmenko, under the pseudonym “Fox”. According to the investigation, it was she who planted the explosives, she is familiar with Andrey Antonenko. Andrei Antonenko allegedly accompanied Kuzmenko when she was planting explosives under Sheremet’s car. Spouses Grishchenko, Inna “Puma” and Vladislav “Bucha” – their role in the Sheremet case is still unknown. Vladislav knows how to make explosives.[end of video]
[Savik Shuster:] I invite the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Arsen Avakov, to the microphone. Mr. Minister, 3.5 years have passed, I just would like to, without any difficult questions, but just tell us how the investigation went and why it is now …
Address by Minister Avakov 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Good evening, Ukraine! Good evening studio! Good evening, Savik. I would like to have difficult questions and I will try to outline …
[Savik Shuster:] And you will …
[Arsen Avakov:] Thank you, I will try to explain it so that everyone understands. I asked today that we do not take here today … do not invite here the police officers who were directly involved in this matter, they had quite difficult 2 days, they had little rest and let them go about their business. I am a civilian and I want to tell you how it was…. with this case … all these difficult … times, 3.5 years.
about the difficulties of the investigation: the bomb exploded and left no traces 💿
Pavel Sheremet was blown up, the crime was very complex, as it turned out a little later – technically well prepared. The bomb exploded, leaving almost no trace. We invited the FBI experts at the very beginning, our best expert forces gathered and we, bit by bit … collected everything that was at that time. Including collected video from nearly 200 CCTV cameras. We collected traffic for 2,000,000 phones that communicated there and had between each other… A separate group worked by analyzing telephone connections, a separate group worked on the cars that were in this area, a separate group looked through these thousands of hours and looked at these video cameras. We got access to all the cameras, but in the end we saw that our array lacks 4 surveillance cameras, more precisely, data from four surveillance cameras, and this is now the subject of a separate investigation, our separate attention and a separate interest, as we go further … I will talk about this today. And we started to analyze all the groups that fit …. the commission of this crime.
various versions: we took a fairly wide version of destabilization as a basic one 💿
What versions. We immediately considered the version that this was an error of the target, since Pavel Sheremet drove a car that belonged to the editor-in-chief of Ukrainska Pravda,
[Savik Shuster:] Alyona Pritula.
[Arsen Avakov:] Alena Pritule I think maybe I was mistaken, maybe she was…. she … Chief of Ukrainian Pravda, so I will say, probably, and perhaps it was a mistake of the object, they wanted to attack her. This was the first version. The second was the version that some kind of conflict related to his work activities. The third version was that this is destabilization … and the fourth, and we consistently, there were many of these versions, we consistently discarded. We did not see confirming factors that this was a mistake of the object, we did not see that this is a personal conflict based on some kind of personal relationship, we did not see that this was a situation related to his working relationship or some kind of investigation. As a result, we took as a basic, such a fairly broad version that after all, this is an attempt to destabilize, including, with different options, made within the country, by forces within the country, made by forces within the country with an attempt at foreign influence and separately made by direct foreign the influence of the Russian Federation. Then we had this as one of the hypotheses, since Pavel was an active author of quite controversial literature in Russia, including writing his book with Nemtsov, there was a version that this was one of such possibilities. We have collected information. We came up with lists of girls who participated in this video, we came up with lists of guys, we studied explosive technicians separately, we took an array of 12,000 photos, trying to find only by available photo and video footage and narrowed it down to a certain number and, at the end in the end, came to the analysis of all similar cases that occurred before and after the crime.
a story about the Grishchenkos family: they found traces of DNA on a mine that “practically looks like” the one that “did not leave any traces” 💿
There were about 35 such crimes that we watched in detail. And while analyzing them, we caught on two cases where, in our opinion, similar methods were used, and the key case was the case of murder … attempted murder in the city of Kosiv, in Ivano-Frankivsk region, where almost the same, identical, explosives were used which Pavel Sheremet had in the car. After the explosion at Sheremet, we collected this explosive bit by bit, recreated the model and understood that MON-50 elements, elements of remote blasting, and fastening elements were used there. And suddenly we discover that in the town of Kosiv [the city of Kosiv – Ukrainian] there was an attempt to detonate, when the person also attached this bomb to the bottom of the car, but did not take into account that in the case of Sheremet’s car, the bottom of the car was completely iron and the magnets were well attached , and in the case of Kosiv, there was some plastic, so it was visually attached, but when the car started, the bomb fell off. A man came out, thinking that my carburetor fell off … or that it fell off … the exhaust pipe, saw that it was a bomb, called the police. We then got a bomb in our hands that did not explode, we, of course, were able to take all traces, prints, DNA elements from it, carried out a molecular analysis and then began to analyze who installed, that is, about the same situation as in Sheremet. And then we quickly identified the car that was used by the perpetrators, we quickly established who was behind the wheel, the connections and went to the citizen … what is his last name, Lord, Grishchenko and he is “Bucha” … but he is “Bucha” you showed him. A person who has been convicted 6 times, 6 times and was engaged in similar things, similar crimes. We found that when we took traces of DNA from him, we found that these traces of this person’s DNA match the DNA traces on this unexploded mine. We noticed that this mine is practically similar to the mine where the situation with Pavel Sheremet was, with the only difference that in the case of Sheremet, the mine was detonated remotely, with a remote control, and here there was a special twine that was designed for movement, movement and pulling out something there and the car exploded. “Bucha” was detained and arrested. For operational reasons, already realizing that this issue was interesting, we did not touch his accomplices, as it seemed to us at that time, it was his wife, “Puma”, and Mr. Vakulenko, nicknamed “Pistol”. Mister … Mrs. Grishchenko, whose voice you heard today, and who talked a lot and said many different terrible things. We even published there barely 5-7% of this volume yesterday, which convinced us that there is something to hide. We saw this group and decided that the weakest element of this group, who is ready, apparently, to give some information for the investigation, is Mr. Vakulenko, nicknamed “Pistol”. To whom the summons was handed over, and to his surprise the summons was handed not in the case of the murder in Kosiv, but in the case of Sheremet. This brought him into a shocking state, and it also brought Bucha and Puma into the same shocking state. “Puma” … we showed this audio yesterday, I don’t know if you have one? Yes? where “Puma” calls her husband in prison and says, I want to tell you that he is being summoned in the case of Sheremet, Vakulenko. And he says in a sad voice “You killed me.” Well, there are a lot of such things. Unfortunately, we did not calculate the degree of emotion within this group and Ivan Ivanovich Vakulenko, instead of going for interrogation the next day, went to his parents’ house, where they, their deceased parents, where his sister lived, took a shotgun out of the safe and shot himself in the head. After that, we hear the conversation of the same persons involved, the spouses, who are discussing this death among themselves, where “Bucha” tells him maybe it’s even good, now we can hang on to him and so on. I am trying to tell you only that, today, Savik, and dear sirs, that … what is allowed to me by the investigation, I am trying to catch my tongue so as not to say too much and, at the same time, give you a complete picture. Therefore, you will excuse me, you will ask questions if I get lost somewhere. So, it convinced us that we are on the right track.
minister talks about his personal participation in the investigation: he and others “drew schemas” 💿
But this was one of the groups. So I’ll just show you my working diagram from a distance, because even I was confused, there were about 20 such groups that we tracked. Such is the working diagram, where we drew, everyones made notes here.
a story about the blowing up of electrical pylons in Crimea 💿
And suddenly, we were developing in parallel a group that took part in blowing up the pillars in the Crimea, remember, they blew up the power pylons , patriots appeared there so as not to supply electricity to Crimea. And there we drew attention to one group that, it seemed to us, had communication with this Mr. Riffmaster, who, as we saw, lived in the immediate vicinity of the crime scene.
presentation of the version about the alleged disappearance of intruders and an overnight stay at Antonenko’s house 💿
And here comes a nuance. Today you showed the path how these two walked, who planted a mine under Sheremet. We saw how they walked along the streets, walked around the block. And these many hundreds of video cameras that recorded these movements, we collected all of them and simulated the situation and suddenly saw that in some place they disappear, that is, they enter at this moment, they should appear on the next camera, but they are absent. And we concluded that these people went into some kind of apartment or somewhere in the house. To spend the night. Because they have not appeared anywhere else. That is, they had nowhere to go. We saw that there was the apartment of this man, nicknamed “Riffmaster”, Mr. Antonenko. We turned our attention there. And while developing this person and developing the Grishchenko group, we did not understand that it could be one group. We have not seen any connection between them. We worked separately, watched this group, this one. We watched the groups two more at the finish line. And suddenly we notice another person who suddenly turned out to be a connecting link between these groups. And when “Bucha”, Grishchenko’s wife was arrested … He came … [Savik Shuster:] “Puma” [Arsen Avakov:] oh, I beg your pardon, oh, I beg your pardon, I already have … yes, Puma, Grishchenko’s wife, yes. The person who took her car after the arrest turned out to be a colleague, or, well … I don’t dare to evaluate Mrs. Kuzmenko (Lisa) and Mr. Antonenko as a partner . We have collected all this information. We were constantly analyzing what to do with it. We saw that there was a connection, we could not settle the situation. We are not dealing with a crime in which we caught a criminal with a knife in his hand and blood flowing down so that we could prove everything. We needed to analyze and show it. And we turned to experts, here Mr. Ruvin is present, the head of the Kiev Forensic Institute. What we did, we took all this gigantic … just gigantic amount of video, mostly of poor quality. We pulled out those pieces where the persons involved in this situation are most clearly visible . When we … The people who planted the mines and the people who did the scouting. We made sure that there were people who carried out scouting before the crime in order to think out ways of escape and so on. And another video, where a woman, apparently in a wig, obviously in different clothes, in the morning after she pressed the explosion button, left the scene of the crime. We collected all these videos and gave them to our experts.
a story about the unexpected results of the examination: the expert’s opinion must be “laid down” in the basis of the accusation 💿
In parallel, we filmed a video live all the people that we somehow suspected that they might be involved. And they gave it to the experts so they could compare. We have received preliminary conclusions of the examination. Personally, when we gave these documents, I thought that the wife of Grishchenko is the very couple who are here together go and plant this explosive, but suddenly the experts showed us the opposite. What is not, it is not, and what this pair is two: one – mister Riffmaster, and his other girl, who is namely one planting a mine, this is Mrs. Kuzmenko (“Fox”). An expert’s conclusion is already serious. It should be laid down as the basis for the accusation. We cannot ignore him.
[Savik Shuster:] As far as we understand, there were 2 expert groups.
a story about the appearance of Birch: he flew in with his opinion 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Yes. But. We understood what kind of resonance it was and what kind of public attention it was. So we turned I reached out to my colleagues in the UK and to the United States. And we asked who could help us, in addition to our Institute of Forensic Expertise, to conduct an examination of these situations. They all named one specialist for us. This is the British Royal Expert, Mr. Birch. That is, the number one specialist in the world who conducts gait identification analysis, on orthopedic nuances, movements and so on. He is a very busy person, he is a very qualified person, he works all over the world. We have been waiting for his examination for a long time. The last time we waited 2 weeks for him to finish working in the USA. And he received this data from us, and, in fact, before going to the detention and to the next phase, here conducting the investigation, we wanted to compare expertise Institute of Expertise, our KNIISE and British Institute. After which, it was the day after Normandy. I flew in with the President, and Mr. Birch arrived by plane. He flew in with his findings. The findings were exactly the same as our domestic experts pointed out to us, they pointed to two people. As far as I know, a meeting of experts was held, after which an opinion was signed. About identifying people who are on tapes. And we couldn’t help but react. None of our reaction would have already been a crime. So, our suspicion is based on the most important thing – expertise, at the very bottom, which points to these people. “Puma” and “Bucha” made a mine, almost identical to the mine that detonated Pavel Sheremet. And this is proven by traces of DNA and … in this non-exploded mine. [Savik Shuster:] The one that was in Ivano-Frankivsk region? [Arsen Avakov:] Yes! Antonenko and Kuzmenko aka “Fox”. “Riffmaster” and “Fox”. According to the examination, they were the two people who planted mine under the car of Pavel Sheremet. And this is the second fact.
lies about phones that “didn’t answer” 💿
Now we, let’s talk after the first brick, about the rest of the facts-bricks. Antonenko … Antonenko: indirect facts, as follows. Antonenko lives in the place where it gone cold… the traces of this couple have gone cold – that’s number one. Antonenko’s phone, we tracked the traffic, at the time of the crime was in one location and did not work. But that is, he did not answer, did not call, nothing happened. What is atypical behavior for that person’s phone. Other days and other long times he either talked or went online, so his phone was in one place, in his apartment, and did not answer. Fox, aka Kuzmenko, was at that moment in Kiev, her phone did not answer. I no longer remember the exact time from and to … Yes, from 8 pm to 9 am, just at the time when the active phase of this murder was going on and was located at her home. This is completely atypical, because this person liked to talk on the phone, and we also saw how active she was … she just came home from work, she just didn’t get off the phone, she talked, talked … And this time, on this very day, it was silent. This is the second circumstantial evidence.
about Antonenko’s lameness: “in this video he drags his leg a little” 💿
Mr. Antonenko, in this video, if you see, he limps a little, he drags his leg a little. Yes. And it became known to us that, and he himself declared this, that he some time before this X-point, had done surgery on his leg. An operation to remove veins, I think, or something. And it led to… a certain … a little leg dragging… features, yes features. The expert helps. Of a leg. This is also a fact. But the very last one too, a print on the back. When it was performed … here is this specific clothing that you see on … when they walk away near the monument, there she has a video; when they leave, here, pay attention to this video on the screen, now. A man leaves, on his back, do you see a print like this, very specific? This is his favorite clothes. Well, many people can wear such clothes, but here the totality of these comparisons … Antonenko was searched yesterday and several of these jackets were seized from him. I don’t know if this jacket is different, a lot of time has passed after all, experts will be engaged, there will be an investigative experiment, it will be clarified. And now the totality of these all the circumstances convinced us that that we need to go to the next step.
various other considerations and reasons for the arrest 💿
Well imagine, I am the Minister of the Interior, I am a civilian, I still doubt whether all the facts are enough, but can I, can the investigation, can the police, having such facts on hand, not raise suspicions about these persons? No we can not. And a suspicion was raised. And I see what is happening in our society, social networks. Naturally, this is a shock for everyone, it was a shock for me, for me it is also more of a shock, because I know more than you, I read more than you, they show me more. And there are facts that are completely shocking, there is a conversation about the fact that Kiev should be bombarded with the Grad [ multiple rocket launcher] in order to cheer it up, this is bad, but not himself … not the worst thing. All these gentlemen say that they are not guilty, that they have nothing to do with this crime. Mr. Vakulenko says that he is an honest musician, but we have a suspicion of him. [Savik Shuster:] Antonenko, I suppose. [Arsen Avakov:] Yes, I beg your pardon, Antonenko, but we have suspicions of him. Mr. Vakulenko nicknamed “The Pistol” shot himself. I couldn’t stand Sheremet. And when the first time he calls “Fox” and says: “You know …” – not “Fox”, but “Puma.” “And he says:” You know, I am summoned on the Sheremet case, ” – Well, what is the normal reaction of a normal person? “Which Sheremet?” – I would say – “Well, what have you to do with … How? And we are here …”. And she says: “Yeah, of course I congratulate you, take a lawyer and go.” And when she talks to her husband, then to her own, who is in prison, she says to him: “You know … he shot himself” – he just falls “down”. He says … he says something like “He himself?” – She says: “Yes, himself” – He says “Why?” – He is answered: “He could not bear Sheremet.” We then see that another member of the group declares that he wants to commit suicide, that he did so many bad things … and it’s hard for him to endure. And there are many such situations. All this pushed us to the point that we must move on to the next phase. We decided to detain a group of these people. And the Grishchenko spouses were detained in the case in Ivano-Frankivsk. We detained yesterday Mr. Riffmaster and Mr. … and Mrs. “Fox”, as well as Mrs. Duhar, means, in order to move on to the next phase of more active investigative actions, direct interrogations, searches of apartments, searches of their items … computers …. and so on, so on, so on … And I see that they say: “We have nothing to do with it, I’m generally a musician and so on.”
lies about the MON-50 mine: part of the TNT was removed from it 💿
Just yesterday, and the investigation today at the last moment though, allowed me to make this fact public. Just yesterday… When we they began to conduct searches, and we were very correct, you can’t detain a person, especially … well a war veteran with procedural violations. We cannot detain him immediately under Article 208, because 3.5 years have passed. We got a court order we came to this man, Antonenko, when he came to his home. And the investigators announced to him that they were going to detain him and conduct a search. According to the procedural rules, at this moment we must wait for a lawyer. And it took some time when we were waiting for a lawyer to arrive to Mr. Antonenko. He was restricted in his movement, but he was free. He wrote posts on his Internet, and he was on the phone, and wrote sms, despite the fact that his telephone was under control on the basis of a prosecutor’s sanction. And there was such a situation: he wrote to the person who lived with him in the same apartment, to his wife’s brother: “Urgently, urgently go to the apartment and take this green thing from there … “termiovo” [urgently – Ukrainian] “. – While the investigators are standing below, near the entrance, together with him, he writes to this man … and… and his wife’s brother takes this green thing and takes it out of the apartment. We tracked down who this person was who took out this green thing. We tracked where he took it. We had 3 versions. And so at night, two additional urgent searches were unexpectedly carried out. Well, maybe you are a prosecutor, you understand, yes, what an urgent search is. When it is impossible to wait so as not to lose evidence And so at night 2 volunteers were searched, who had communication and found nothing there … we apologize to these people here, but it was necessary for the investigation. And the third address we got to, we found this item that is now on the screen, it’s a little green thing this is a mine MON-50, which is in a half-disassembled state, which is unscrewed and the cover removed, from which part of the TNT was withdrawn and, so to speak, certain work was carried out there. That is, in fact, this is about half of the element that made up the bomb, under the blown up Pavel Sheremet or under a car in Kosiv. I am not saying that this element is the same, the same bomb, I am not saying that this is an element something else, but it’s strange when a musician who says “I’m a musician” so for a minute, keeps a MON-50 mine at home, which can kill a huge number of people. And … I admit that every war veteran brings a souvenir from the war, although this is very bad, there and they sometimes freak out and explode…. there is a grenade or some cartridges. But to keep mine, especially to unfold…. therefore, our suspicions in this matter only increase. Probably better if questions are asked, because I’m already too I speak for a long time … [Savik Shuster:] No, no, I think that many people do not know the details of who is there … [Arsen Avakov:] It’s very important for me to say, Savik, forgive me … [Savik Shuster:] Here are 30 seconds [Arsen Avakov:] The investigation has not been completed, we have not stopped the investigation and will not draw all the conclusions, we do not have answers to a number of questions. We still receive them, we do not have full answers about the initiators of the case. And this is a separate serious conversation. Because the initiators of this case, besides the performers themselves, are these. Apparently it will be separate, a serious conclusion from our investigation.
[Savik Shuster:] So, all questions, comments, exactly after the commercial break
Resume transmission 💿
[Savik Shuster:] Live broadcast, Freedom of speech, Ukraine TV channel, Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov at the microphone, Sevgil, please.
[Sevgil Musaeva:] Thank you very much for …
[Savik Shuster:] By the way, you can go to the microphone, because it is no coincidence that there are 2 of them.
Sevgil Musaeva’s speech 💿
[Sevgil Musaeva:] Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, for your report. I’ll probably start by saying that of course yesterday … the announcement of the briefing was a very emotional moment for us. I mean the editorial board of Ukrainska Pravda, because, I probably need to say that before this 3.5 years we knew practically nothing about what was happening and the investigation was actually classified, as the minister said. In September 2017, if my memory serves me, and since that time, when we sent any requests, or asked questions to law enforcement agencies, we were told that “we are conducting an investigation”. Of course, yesterday’s news of the first detainees and the announcement of the briefing gave hope. What we heard, and I think it’s not just our emotion, really shocked. Because, in fact, we are talking about people who … Well, with whom we have mutual acquaintances, mutual friends, and when we published our position yesterday, and including people who were familiar with Yulia Kuzmenko or with Andrey Antonenko, asking them to send us information, their friends began writing to us. telling about that for example, Andrei Antonenko, but he cannot, for example, build a musical career for himself in 10 years, and you want him to organize a murder. Or Yulia Kuzmenko, who worked at Okhmatdet and was a surgeon who saved lives of people, children, young children, while the candidate of medical sciences, who writes her doctoral dissertation, but somehow does not fit in my head, that’s completely, right? This social portrait and also volunteered at the front. Here is this social portrait that has been formed, including on social networks and in society, it absolutely runs counter to mine, planting a mine, and with those conversations that yesterday, including we heard all over the country. Concerning questions … We also published them, because, of course, the version that was voiced the consequence is the destabilization of the political situation in the country, it begs the question. Yes? Why was our colleague chosen? Yes, he is a well-known journalist, but the history of “Ukrainian Truth”. You know that in 2000 there was our founder Georgy Gongadze was killed and perhaps there was some analogy … yes … between what happened in 2000 and 2016. This cannot be ruled out, but the time of the crime, yes, this is the middle of summer, this is a period of vacations and, as it were, for destabilization, well, a difficult time. Yes? For instance. We’re talking questions, we’re asking questions now. Second, well, after all, if we talk about destabilization, then the goal was not achieved, because there was no change of government, for example, as was the case and we remember that when a Slovak journalist was killed, or when a journalist was blown up in Malta in the same way … a journalist Daphne Galicia. And this was followed by resignation law enforcement, the head of law enforcement, the resignation of the government, rallies, protests, in the case of the murder of our colleague, this did not happen. Naturally, we have a question about motive. The motivation of people, first of all, ATO-participants, veterans who did it. I talked this morning with people who were familiar with both Yana Duhar and Yulia Kuzmenko. They nod their heads and speak, but we do not know, perhaps they could have been used somehow, we do not exclude this. And been used in some situations. But like this … again, if we proceed from a social portrait, if we speak from personal communication, they just don’t understand it. Participation in such a high-profile crime and the way it was done. We are talking about the method right away. Here. And the main question is, after all, the customer. And here mister minister still, probably, cannot say anything and or knows something but cannot speak, because from the information that you announced today, Arsen Borisovich, the conclusion suggests itself that after all we are talking about some kind of group that worked under the cover of special services, special services … what country’s special services were it, if Ukraine, then this is probably a question here, how would maybe you can tell us something about your colleagues, whether such a working version is being developed, regarding participation of people who lead the special services in Ukraine, or some departments. This is probably my question for you…. Here. And, yes, and of course, we can say, probably, yesterday we discussed this with a team that this group of people, well, does not look like the organizers of the crime. That is, after all, customers … the names of the customers are still too early, probably, to talk about this and, probably, I am addressing this question to you.
Minister’s answer to the question about the organizers 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Thank you for your question … You are right that I can only say what I can and I will say something. The truth, but not all, I will say so. Well, let’s start a little, after all, with something else. It will be in the context of what you asked. In our country, after 5 years of war, a huge number of people have combat experience. A huge number of people have orders, medals, services to the country, real heroes. And in the same way, we have very respected people who devote themselves to protecting the country, these are volunteers. I know an amazing number of these people, they are wonderful people. It doesn’t mean all of them are. And it does not mean that if there are such people among them who commit crimes, everyone else is rascal and that discredits everyone. Not at all. But you have to be honest, honest to yourself. And if a war veteran, a young guy, with an order on his chest, a sniper, shoots like a hired killer, kills a three-year-old child, as it was, there … two weeks ago in Kiev, near restaurant Mario. It is a fact, yes he is an order bearer, he is a war hero, but he is a hired killer. And we have to react, otherwise we are not a society. Yes, the Russians hired our veterans for the murder a former Russian deputy. The surname flew out …
[Sevgil Musaeva:] Voronenkov.
[Arsen Avakov:] Voronenkov. Yes, unfortunately in murder of the prominent volunteer Oleshko veterans were participating as well. Yes, unfortunately, veterans also participated in the murder of Ekaterina Gandzyuk and this is a problem, a gigantic problem of our society. The United States got Vietnam Syndrome after Vietnam. I no longer remember more accurate statistics, in my opinion about 60% of the soldiers, who passed Vietnam, were brought to justice. They were arrested by the police, detained by the police, or they were scored in some other things. [Savik Shuster:] 60% is a lot. 2/3 means a violation of some kind, I will clarify this figure, I will try to give it publicly, so as not to lie to you now. We have a very similar situation according to our data, from 300 to 400 thousand people went through the war, that’s a lot. And we come to what you are asking. In the case of Voronenkov these people were led from abroad, they were hired, manipulated. In case of… In the case of our Kherson activist Gandzyuk, these people were manipulated and hired, most likely within the country. In the case of the murder of a child who … well, the sniper attempted on his father, it was pure hiring, he was assigned, he was given an address, he was escorted, he was promised $ 1000, and if he fulfills – another $ 20,000, he honestly says that it is true. And in this case, the most complicated crime, who made the explosives, who calculated the route, who prepared the intelligence. We see scouts walking around taking cameras thinking about escape routes, who finally covered these people during the investigation. Where did the recordings from 4 surveillance cameras go, which the police were unable to access?
[Savik Shuster:] This is where …
[Sevgil Musaeva:] Do you have answers to these questions?
[Arsen Avakov:] I am putting these questions to you, so that there is understanding and I also like you, as well as the investigation, there is a certain feeling that there are people who are still behind the scenes, outside this scheme, our charges that were initiators or co-initiators of this crime. And I am therefore to you I say it again, this investigation is not completed. This crime has not been solved we are only in the first phase, when we see people suspected of involvement to the execution of the crime. And it’s not over yet. I can’t say anymore. Now you want more from me, I can’t say more …
[Sevgil Musayeva:] Mister Minister, here is just a clarifying question, which concerns the fact that all these three and a half years the investigation was conducted by the National Police, now you say that someone interfered, someone did not contribute. Can you voice some facts, or say where there was this resistance? It seems to me that this is also very important information for society and not talking about it, well, is probably wrong.
Minister’s answer to the question about obstruction of the investigation 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Okay, I’ll tell you. I promised I was telling the truth, but I’m trying to limit myself. In the early days of this murder, it is very important, in hot pursuit, law enforcement officers know, colleagues are present here. In hot pursuit, it is important to collect facts quickly and get results. And my colleagues from the SBU and I collected video from surveillance cameras. We had several brigades and we collected, the more we did not know who will investigate the case. Usually an explosion is investigated, it’s like a terrorist attack – then it’s a security service, like a murder – then it’s investigated by the police. As a result, the prosecutor decided that the police should investigate. And we began to collect all these materials in ourselves. All camera records, all traffic records and so on, and we didn’t find four cameras, we couldn’t get them, these are good cameras, in good places, in places very necessary for us, with good quality. We were told: “We gave them to you before we gave them … it is strange that you did not receive them. And they were not. There was probably nothing on the record. ” Well, I’m oversimplifying this. And the truth is that this is a separate line of investigation that we are doing. Throughout our investigation, we felt that someone gives information to our suspects, it was this that was the reason that in the seventeenth year we no longer knew how, limited, extremely classified the investigation and understood the essence of what was happening, literally a few people, and the leadership of the police, and the ministry. That is why one of our operations has already been stopped, because our suspects, who are part of the group of these guys, information was also given by someone. That is why I say that there are people who are still behind the scenes, and it seems to us that they are much more professional than the perpetrators of this crime. We expect that no matter how long the rope twists, there will be an end. [Sevgil Musaeva:] Is it possible to link the progress of the investigation with the change of leadership some law enforcement agencies or the country’s leadership in general?
Minister’s answer to the question about the change of leadership and about “help” from the prosecutor’s office 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] But in the case of the police, on the contrary, I want to thank the entire investigation team that worked and before that and collected this huge array of information. Sergei Knyazev, who headed the police before. It is not connected with us, but I do not think, honestly, that it is connected with others. And Prosecutor General Lutsenko, and Prosecutor General Ryaboshapka helped us, but we are pulling this thread. [Sevgil Musayeva:] And the question is about the motive, your personal opinion, as the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, after all, what was the motive for these people?
Minister’s answer to the question about the absence of motive. “What motive? This is schizophrenia, pure water, this is some inadequacy ” 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Well, you are asking for a motive, so we would … I’m looking at a photo of the children’s doctor “Fox” Kuzmenko, which in a conversation with her friend, which was made public, we declassified this conversation … Offers to find a sacred victim. Well, for example, she says, Marusya Zvirobyi, here she says she attacks the President, let it fit beautifully with the sacred sacrifice, by the way she says, “Does she have children? Yes! “It would be nice to steal the children.” I have a gap of consciousness: children’s doctor offers to find a sacred victim and steal the children. What could be the motive? I am in the same state … as you are. What could be the motive to shell Kiev by GRAD? What motive? This is schizophrenia, pure water, this is some inadequacy and, yes, it would be just chatter of men or women, but these people are related to a specific charge. Therefore, I already perceive this chatter as an applied thing. And the key motive, after all, it seems to me that this still destabilizing, after all, on some possible, there are nuances. I have already said, as before, I do not rule out the situation that this is revenge for the activities of Paul from the territory of another state.
Speech by Editor-in-Chief “Censor.net” Yuri Butusov 💿
[Savik Shuster:] Yuri Butusov. Thank you, Sevgil.
[Yuri Butusov:] I would like to say that at this stage the court session is still in progress in the Antonenko case and this is the first day today when a trial was held only on the election of a preventive measure, therefore, it is probably more correct to start saying that all these people who are being talking about here are just people who are suspected. This is, well, let’s say, direct evidence at the moment, what we see, from direct evidence of the involvement of these people, we see exclusively an opinion signed by a British expert, which says about gait. Even the presence of a certain mine does not in any way speak of involvement nor the presence of direct evidence related to Andriy Antonenko, nor to Yulia Kuzmenko. And it’s important to note that these people have a reputation, great publicity, now at the moment, the trial is still underway to select a preventive measure for Antonenko. To speak, or to create some kind of appearance about what is really already predetermined specifically the involvement of these specific individuals to this crime at the moment it is forbidden.
Minister Avakov declares permission to arrest as confirmation of suspicion and extra-procedural influence on the judge: “we presented the court with a more complete amount of information, they made a decision” 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Let me correct you, before that, there was still a court decision, which made it possible to arrest these people. We detained them before that. We presented the court with a more complete amount of information, they made a decision. [Yuri Butusov:] Yes, of course. I have a question. I just want to understand everyone, so that we don’t talk about these people here, as that they are really the perpetrators of this crime. [Arsen Avakov:] Suspects … [Yuri Butusov:] … they are only suspects whose guilt has yet to be proven. And they and their lawyers will have the right to present their explanations, their explanations, their alibis. Tell about what they were doing at that time, explain their position. What do I have, what question, I would like to ask. And what would now, it was important to hear in my opinion. There was a very loud press conference that provided crazy resonance to this case. A huge number of people heard the names personally the President of the country, personally the Attorney General stated, among other things, about the solution of the case, perhaps having received some information that we do not see yet, but the surge that was yesterday, this information explosion, Considering that, basically, almost all, except for one examination, are circumstantial evidence, obviously pursued the goal of some further reaction, further actions. Please tell me, Mr. Minister, were there any…. whether the investigation received circumstantial evidence as a result of this disclosure, which in the opinion of the investigation, in the opinion of the prosecutor’s office, they speak of involvement, allow to raise suspicions, are there any confessions, does someone speak about their involvement from among those persons, or about this crime from among those persons after being suspected? Are there any specific words, communications that would connect are these circumstantial evidence with real facts?
Minister Avakov answers the question about the lack of direct evidence: “we need to work on their life in more detail, but they refuse to testify” 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Thank you for your question, I would not say that this is what it is only circumstantial evidence, this is evidence of indirect kind. Yes. This is an examination and these are the conclusions and facts that we put into the basis of suspicion. Indeed, they are all under suspicion, this is a normal mechanism, normal jurisprudence. We are suspicious, they are defending themselves. After that, there will be a court decision. But, here you asked about the testimony. Imagine that next to us there is a young girl Yana Duhar, 26 years old, which, as she says, has nothing to do with murder of Pavel Sheremet and They ask her, give … testify on this matter. She says: “Article 63 of the Constitution.” Refuses to testify. Well, if you are a famous singer and you are ready to be completely open, well, well, tell me in detail about your position, tell about your alibi immediately. He refuses to testify, the same thing happens with Kuzmenko. Such a position does not cause me well…. this is their right to defend themselves, but for me this position does not cause an adequate answer. Second … second moment, did our actions give a certain result, you understand, we came to the factor of the investigation, when we need to interrogate these people who now have suspicions, when you need to work with their documents, with their life in more detail, when we need to apply other procedural methods, for example, investigative experiment. You just saw a video 3.5 years ago when people walk by at night monument with a print on the back. We will reproduce these situations. The network begins to publish photos “Oh, he had such a beard, but in fact, he had such a beard, actually like this, ” in these light conditions, well, it’s all nothing more than manipulation. Yesterday, the defenders of Yana Duhar said that, “you know, she was in the ATO at that moment, here is a certificate”, today other defenders say yes no, she was not in the ATO, she was abroad at that moment. We … we know that she received a foreign passport only in the year 2018 and was abroad only after, why lie here … here you need to study all these things. I am not trying to put pressure on anyone or accuse anyone in advance, I believe that each of these people has the opportunity to defend themselves, but I have an order from the people of Ukraine do what I do. This is my job and it wouldn’t be fair if I didn’t. Our units are making these charges.
Dmitry Gordon’s speech: I was guarded by the SBU with dogs 💿
[Savik Shuster:] Dmitry Gordon … [Dmitry Gordon:] I want firstly thank the Minister of the Interior for systemic, such an exhaustive performance, during which I felt uncomfortable and continues to remain uncomfortable, to be honest. Of course, the very fact is terrible, a handsome man Pavel Sheremet, handsome, clever, brilliant person, which is blown up brazenly in the center of Kiev, in front of everyone. A few years – nothing. Now, what they found the killers of the son of Vyacheslav Sobolev, whom I know well and what you showed now, already inspires some timid hope that we have a state. Because if the police are working, then there is a state. Why am I so worried now, because I’m going to say things now that … that nobody knows about. On the eve of the presidential elections in Ukraine, here … the last … extreme, signals were received that they were going to kill me and the SBU personally, the chairman of the SBU, General Gritsak, opened a terrorism case, For several months I was guarded by the Alpha group, about 20 people with dogs, snipers, armored vehicles, escort vehicles, with all the necessary attributes, but this was not life … this … and the case has not been closed yet. Threats came from the Russian Federation to destabilize the situation in the country, on the eve of the elections. Therefore, I understand this motive of what you are talking about, I am experiencing it deeply, I myself have experienced it and am experiencing it. Operational activities are still ongoing, the case has not been closed. I have three moments, three. First. It would be nice if all our cities are equipped with cool cameras. First. Here are just cool cameras and for the criminals to know…. [Applause] [Arsen Avakov:] Do you know where we have the lowest crime rate? Around the country… [Dmitry Gordon:] In Japan, for sure … [Arsen Avakov:] Throughout the country … in Mariupol, front-line city, because there in 15, equipped with a special super-monitoring system and everyone knows this … [Dmitry Gordon:] There must be cameras everywhere so that every fool, a criminal knows that he is still visible. Petrov-Bashirov, the so-called, yes, Chipiga and Mishkin. Grushniki, GRU-men, those humble GRU-men have arrived to poison Skripal, yes … and they are captured from all sides and because United Kingdom…. UK damn it Salisbury Monastery they came to watch, as they said, in short, first, cameras are needed. Second, I am now addressing the Verkhovna Rada: repeal the lustration law, and I’ll explain why now. This law was written in Moscow, in order to weaken the Ukrainian army, police, SBU, border troops and so on … this law was put forward here in the Verkhovna Rada by Russian agents and our SBU leaders know who I am talking about, it should be canceled so that the best investigators, operatives that worked, what’s the difference under Yanukovych or under Yushchenko or under Tsar Saltan, so that they go about their immediate business. I think that Arsen Borisovich is missing competent, good investigators. I’m sure of it. The second is to abolish the law on lustration, and, finally, the third. This is the most important thing I think it’s a matter of honor for the minister to answer the question: who are the organizers of this crime? This is extremely … extremely important. Thanks.
Question from Alexander Martynenko 💿
[Savik Shuster:] Alexander Martynenko.
[Alexander Martynenko:] From my own perspective, one question will be … minister, you know, all these events of the last two days, this presentation, it just really hit hard on many, on the consciousness of people. How it may be, such people who are wonderful, who are volunteers, volunteers can be criminals. You understand, they can. We just need to get used to us that it can be, they are the same people like all. Yes, they fought. Yes, they did not give it away … many of them, by the way, died at the front, indeed. By the way, in that Second World War, people who were criminals died in penal battalions, nevertheless, they were perished at the front. Yes. Some of them “atoned for their guilt,” as they used to say, and some did not. They came back from the war and continued to kill to steal and plunder all this was. The war actually turns society upside down. It flips over. I would say, you know, good people get … get better, and bad people get worse. And we may not see them right away, there is already a beautiful picture. See he is there – a guy with a gun, of that 95 brigade, 7-6 times convicted, before that. Beginning from the age of 17 the first … first trip to jail. Yes, he didn’t change from the fact that he picked up a machine gun and defended the homeland. No, he returned from the war and continues to do what he did. It is very difficult to realize this … you know … this not a black and white story, and therefore we need to get used to the fact that a war hero can really be a criminal, and a criminal can be a war hero. And do not rush every time to a beautiful post on Facebook, to beautiful … to the beautiful words that “yes, I knew him, but he couldn’t,” but the person who writes about this knew, it turns out that he knew him for 2 years. That he does not know what he was doing here are the previous 46. You should be less gullible, it’s also true you need more … more listening, more looking and more thinking. But it’s so common consideration for everyone, and Arsen Borisovich, I have a question for you.
[Arsen Avakov:] Before your question. I just can’t, I’ll tell you. Let it be very bitter to realize what you are saying. This is absolutely true. I created most of the volunteer battalions in 2014, it was necessary for all of us when … people needed to stand up to protect us. And in the same year, we disbanded the “Shakhtersk” battalion. I disbanded it by my order for looting and for mocking people. A significant part of these people now convicted, in prison. But I am scared and painful all the time when he speaks, and the Shakhtersk battalion is scum. Not scum, because 17 of them died in the attack near Ilovaisk. Therefore, life is not black and white.
[Alexander Martynenko:] Yes. And not everyone really combing out one size fits all, this is the fate of each person individually, so you need to talk about each one. And I would like to say a few words about this crime. I always had a question I understand that I will try to make it so that you do not answer directly. I understand that you cannot answer directly. But my colleagues and I just watched this whole presentation yesterday. there was an acute impression that this crime was prepared and executed in an extremely professional manner. I remember the first days of the investigation, no one could understand where, no one could understand what happened. Now we have already told how the cameras were filmed, this is really a super professional job and really, why there were doubts, these people are not like those who work professionally, that is indeed, someone was in charge. Why, we say, not only about the initiator, but also about the leader, organizer, a highly professional in this matter. Such professionals, as we know, work and that is, they worked or are working in the special services. No other options, no bandit for any, maybe I’m wrong, you know better, of course, you come across practice. It seems to me that no bandit can learn this. in practice. It must be truly professionals. But further on, we really understand that these people were so sure that no one would find them, that they did not leave anywhere, did not hide and so on, I mean it seems to me that they were sure that they would be covered at the right moment. If these are my thoughts, if they seem … if I am wrong about something, you tell me. And if I’m not mistaken, does this mean that the people who covered them now work in the special services, Ukrainian and foreign?
Minister Avakov lies about the patron who must “pull out and protect”, about special glasses and fantasizes about photographing cars by Andrey Antonenko to create duplicate cars: “the most complicated technical crime, the President was shocked” 💿
[Arsen Avakov:] Yes, in the conversation of our suspects there are several pages of text where they appeal to a certain to his patron, who must pull them out and protect them. Yes, we are looking at this closely. Yes, the crime was prepared in excess … thought out and super precise, I’ll show you a small photo now, we didn’t talk about it yesterday. This is a girl in a wig, special glasses, then she comes out of another place in different clothes, this is the person who pressed the button. We have hypotheses who this person is, but we don’t know for sure. That is, this is a multifactorial crime: reconnaissance, withdrawal, planning a route, hiding after the crime, laying cars. For some reason, Mr. Antonenko all the previous day amused himself by photographing just standing cars in this quarter. Why, it would seem, because they were interested in our hypothesis. Create… there are the so-called car replicas. A Volkswagen car with the same license plate drove in the police then after the crime look, whose car, maybe a stranger drove in, and this is Vasya’s car, it is constantly parked here. They created these replicas, that is, this is the most complex technical crime. What we talked about with Mr Zelensky after the press conference, where he was also shocked, he told me too … he said this at a press conference and told me. Hirers, I say, you must understand that in order to identify hirers, I need help … I don’t have enough of the Prosecutor General’s Office, you need to talk to the SBU and you need to talk to the Main Intelligence Directorate. Today, in the morning, I had contact with the head of the SBU, he met with the chief of police today, we will connect certain our capabilities. That’s all I can tell you.
[Savik Shuster:] Irina Gerashchenko, I did not introduce Irina, co-chair of the European Solidarity fraction.
Question from Irina Gerashchenko 💿
[Irina Gerashchenko (Ukrainian):] Thank you, dear colleagues, you know my personal position, of course it largely coincides with this statement made yesterday by Ukrainskaya Pravda. Obviously, when you hear such shocking information, first of all you sympathize and think about the family and loved ones of Paul … and these days I want to mention it again and wish courage to loved ones, to hear all this horror. It is also very important that the investigation is carried out honestly, professionally, it is important that international experts are involved here. and on this you … the previous government insisted, in order to attract international experts, it is important that the culprits, organizers, customers, nevertheless should be established by the investigation, but not appointed, it is very important to really be aware, in order to identify the perpetrators … identifying the perpetrators, there was no discrediting in general army, volunteer movement, volunteer movement. What sounded right in this studio that in every field, profession, politics, in the army, in volunteers there are good and bad. It is obvious. But now questions. Yes, which I would like to ask the Minister. First, you know, recently, just like this a year and a half ago, this is how one was arrested People’s Deputy who tried to blow up the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, at least she was suspected of this, in what state is this case? I do not want to name everyone’s names, because then questions will arise yes, but in what state is this matter, because there are analogies. First. Second, you said, Mr. Minister, a very important thing, that the customers and organizers have not been established, but you … that these are very professional people. And these colleagues confirm this, but you gave so much information, that I, a non-professional person, I think, but these professionals who are now probably watching this, maybe you gave them any tips on how to hide? Have you provided significantly more information than you need to do now? Third question. Why the President attended this briefing as welly? After all, his presence there, on the one hand it sort of identifies the culprits, and on the other hand, if it ends in the same way as with the deputy, who blew up something there, but now didn’t blow it up, then won’t it be a blow to him? And the fourth and last question. Several months ago, in the Office of the President, a public meeting where you were tasked to give certain signals on this matter by the end of the year, otherwise there may be dismissal. Aren’t these things connected now between each other? Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Minister Avakov on the President: “we have provided an interim report with a secret signature. He saw that we were on the way out ” 💿
[Arsen Avakov (in Ukrainian):] Thank you for your question. [Arsen Avakov:] The main thing is Irina understands very well what we are talking about, because she worked a lot in this area, and I am grateful to her for this work. In the security sphere of our country. And the main question that you asked is what I am voicing, what we gave information and a lot of information and important information – am I helping our opponents? Yes, we play chess yes, I give only the information that we consider necessary to give. Yes, this investigation has not been completed. Yes, they set snares for us and we set snares. So here I am, not the cops I am a political figure who can say a little more than particular police officer. And I do everything I say today I got it specially under signature what facts I can divulge, and what not. So that later there was no question. And while we are talking about the presumption of innocence, which speaks … Yuri [Yuri Butusov] and this is very important. Why did the President come? Why did the Attorney General come. Because this is a matter that excites society. I called in the morning President and called the Attorney General, well, he knew about it before, of course, He said that the forensic reports had been signed, we have no reason to stop any longer. We kept a huge group of cops online in large brigades who watched all these heroes relentlessly, who wanted to shoot themselves, then, therefore, to escape, then something else. It couldn’t be kept for long, we had to move on. And we made a decision. I said that we start the action this morning there will be a briefing after lunch, if we make it by this time. The President said, “I will come.” I say, “Well, we welcome you,” the same Attorney General said and naturally he was at the briefing because he knew he was signing these suspicions. He takes responsibility in the same way, he – a procedural person, unlike me, and we think it’s good that there is such attention. For me this is good, because we will need help from other institutions, which are appointed directly by the President of Ukraine. The head of the SBU and the General Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense. These people are very important to us for further here in our situation associated with the identification of these specific people. And I will answer you again, you probably know me for a long time, it’s very difficult to pressure me. Yes, yes we had a conversation and there were several such conversations, with both the previous President and this President, and Presidents, politicians always have a desire resolve all issues quickly and beautifully. In these cases, I say let’s do it not beautifully, but do it right. And I’m glad that … just when we at his request, at the request of the public, “Ukrainian Pravda” demanded, we provided an interim report with a secret signature. He saw that we were on the way out. AND I will be happy if we manage to reach our customers and for everyone to believe in it. And if someone, if we have made a mistake somewhere and think about someone differently from what they really are, the court will decide and they will be able to defend themselves. [Savik Shuster:] David Sakvarelidze
Speech by David Sakvarelidze 💿
[David Sakvarelidze:] First of all … First of all I want to start by saying that yesterday and being in a supermarket somewhere, I listened attentively to the entire briefing of the representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. I also believed that the investigation was in a hurry yet to disclose all these facts that related to the criminal case, I also understood that being a politician, it was politicians who made the decision, not the investigators themselves. And because of the resonance of the case, at least some kind of reaction or public reaction had to be for this case. I absolutely on my own, did not call anyone, everyone will agree, probably, that we have a difficult relationship with Arsen Borisovich [Avakov] and we are not fans of each other, but I still decided … to support investigators, support Ukraine, which fights for its independence, fights for Ukraine to take place as a state. Yes, many haters wrote to me, they wrote to me many of my friends, including for some reason very much for me, very suspiciously turned on a large bot farm, which immediately began to disperse “zrada” [treason – Ukrainian] and so on. This should be investigated separately – it is in the interests of who today is to connect paid people who disperse some information in social networks. But it is not important. And they wrote to me, “David, the same people called you two years ago, called the Kremlin and Mikhail by hand, let’s remember that.” When we are there near the Verkhovna Rada stood and held protest actions that we are enemies states told. “Why do you support, considering the current situation? “Yes, Avakov did not leave, and so on. It does not matter, because if we constantly shout “zrada” [treason – Ukrainian] and if we do not support those people who are fighting today, reach certain results in resonant criminal cases, the state will not take place. As for this case, well, naturally, we all understand that trust in law enforcement agencies is scanty in Ukraine today. And any criminal case, given that we have no victories, yes, we have big criminal victories in the fight against corruption, in the fight against organized crime, there are very few in Ukraine, there are practically few or none of them in this situation. It is easy to discredit any case. We can say that well, here they are stuck on any other phony case, the case is sewn with white thread and so on. But I, leaving the supermarket, while sitting in a taxi, I asked myself a question, while listening to a press conference. As a prosecutor or investigator, would I have signed up for a suspicion [suspicion – Ukrainian] and whether the collected facts are convincing for me as a consequence so that I followed this thread. Of course yes, I would subscribe and would wait while the customers of the criminal case will be named. This time. Second. I was familiar with Pavel Sheremet, we had our disagreements too. He … our last meeting was on Independence Day at the American Embassy. He said he was mistaken about Georgia in many ways, I somehow, deep down in my heart, could not forgive him for the 90s he helped the self-proclaimed “Republic of Abkhazia” in the creation of the First Abkhaz national, some kind of so-called television and so on, he then changed his position, he was in Ukraine, and so on. I naturally had a suspicion that Putin was sending a signal the same as in the case Voronenkov, as well as in the case of Makhauri, as well as in the case of Sheremet. Please note that all explosions or killings have occurred in a kilometer even radius, in the center of Kiev for a year and a half. Yes, that is, Putin is sending a signal that, guys, to hide in Kiev unsafe, that is, do not run to Ukraine, no one will protect you there. Therefore, considering also analyzing the main blow and the line, media line of discrediting Ukraine or an attempt to discredit Ukraine by the Russian Federation is that crazy bloodsuckers came to power in Ukraine, Bandera, deranged, which do not obey any laws, they are against foreigners, they are against journalists, they are crazy and against the Russians, the Russian world, and so on and so forth. Therefore, If I were in their place, I would probably look for those people who best discredit Ukraine, the idea of modern Ukraine and the struggle for the freedom of Ukraine. Who are these people? These people are volunteers, these people are volunteers who protect Ukraine with their blood and life, which took place in recent years as an independent state for the first time in history. This is a full-fledged state that physically fights for their … independence, for their territories, so naturally wondering who it will get to. I would, as a prosecutor, act a little tougher, maybe I would, for example, I would have demanded not to take it, it is clear that the evidence for the youngest girl, I forgot my last name, yes, Duhar, yes may not be strong enough and they asked the court take her on house arrest, rather than taking her into custody, I might have acted harder in this situation. Because now, like air, readings are needed. And I would also ask my friends and not my friends, who are now dispelling this zrada [treason-ukr.] and perceive this criminal case as an attack on volunteers or this closed and very strong energy world, which multiplies, now somehow this is this act, this is the action of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, like an attack on itself – do not do this because God forbid, if it does happen, and they will protect, so to speak future, maybe possible murderers of contract murder, then they will wash away and “channel” [wash down the drain] all this movement, so I would be careful if for example tomorrow some of them will come forward and admit their guilt and tell all this corpus delicti, it will frame the whole movement. Therefore, I ask everyone to be as discreet as possible and yet it is critical at the same time and somehow calmly to approach the results of the trial. And the last one. Savik, if possible, so I saw the speech of the prosecutor today … Still, I would advise more and more carefully and scrupulously approach who acts in courts, who at what level supports either the state prosecution or appears in the courts, because then what he mumbled today, sorry for … for the jargon, it somehow doesn’t fit into anything. Here’s to me didn’t like it when everyone was waiting and waiting for a motive, and in the argumentation of his, therefore, appeal to the court he declares that here, and we detained, it means, the girl who was, means, charged with some kind of nationalist feelings, which there on some racial basis wanted blow up there. She, no one will understand this, it looks ridiculous, that’s why I appeal here to the leadership of the General Prosecutor’s Office, to approach with responsibility and meticulously understand who will appear in court and what he will say, and how he will speak. Thank you, I’m done.
Studio public vote on the validity of the suspicion 💿
[Savik Shuster:] So, based on what David Sakvarelidze said, that he would have signed. Yes, that he would, in general, agree with what is needed present suspicion of murder. But you, and you were convinced by the evidence you heard about today? Now we are not talking guilty, not guilty, we are talking about raising suspicion. Have the evidence convinced you to raise suspicion to those people to whom this suspicion is presented? Pulpit # 19, please, who is working behind it … and pulpit # 27 again.
[Savik Shuster:] Alexander Grigorievich [Ruvin] sorry, but we have already finished the topic. And you didn’t say a word, well.
Speech by Alexander Ruvin. “Our results did not coincide with what the investigation had hoped, because we did not confirm either Grishchenko or Kiyan, that they were at that time, we had to invite this our specialist and our colleague from England” 💿
[Alexander Ruvin:] I can quickly.
[Savik Shuster:] Come on, 30 seconds.
[Alexander Ruvin:] Well, to add to what Arsen Borisovich [Avakov] said today, and to answer Comrade Butusov’s question, I wanted to say … In general, I was born on July 20, it was a very sad day for me, although it was my birthday, I want to say that our institute is 106 years old and 100 years old of them he conducts portrait examinations. And answering a friend …
[Savik Shuster:] 100 years old?
[Alexander Ruvin:] has been carrying out … these examinations for 100 years. Exactly 100 years ago, the first photographic examination. In general, the institute was created in 1913. 106 years old, the king, by decree of the king created this institution. First, we … [David Sakvarelidze:] I hope not the same person as 100 years ago …
[Alexander Ruvin:] No, his last name was Petrov, we discovered these examinations and watched. This is one of the first examinations, it was handwriting, examination of documents and, just portrait expertise. They are the easiest because features of a person and his movement are like handwriting – they cannot be changed. And to answer once again to Comrade Butusov and everyone else sitting here. This year our institute carried out before this examination, there are more than 20 expertise specifically on the non-verbal behavior of people. That is, it is psychological human characteristics. Each person walks in his own way, he he raises his hand in his own way, he puts his leg in his own way. And here it was not necessary to invite a person from Great Britain, we had enough of our own experience, we have been doing this for more than 20 years. But, considering that (literally 1 minute), considering that our results did not coincide with what the investigation hoped, because we did not confirm either Grishchenko or Kiyan, that they were at that time, we had to invite this our specialist and our colleague from England, and together we did perform, not him the commission conducted it together, we checked all the videos, watched how someone walks, puts his feet, everything else and came to the same opinion, which made it possible to issue this examination.
[Savik Shuster:] Thank you, I have to announce a commercial break.