Lawyer Valentin Rybin: Where SBU investigators work is complete chaos
The trial of SBU officer Fedorchuk, who killed a civilian resident of Avdiivka, completed. At least in the court of first instance. The murderer's verdict has been announced. Fedorchuk received 12 years and was stripped of the rank of lieutenant colonel.
For seven years, we have become accustomed to the new “elemental truths” imposed on us: Svidomo murderers are not subject to prosecution, the president is a sucker, the country is Somalia, and the people in it are idiots. But on the first of July, the Kramatorsk City Court showed that from the Ukrainian Themis one can expect not only the “Sternenko incident” and other legal disgrace.
The trial of an SBU officer should become an applied science on how to achieve justice in Ukrainian conditions. The Facebook post of the famous lawyer Maxim Mogilnitsky about this case reflected the general enthusiasm of many of his colleagues: “I hope that the verdict will stand in appeal and cassation. This will give us hope that other murderers, looters and rapists will get exactly what they deserve».
We talked about this long judicial marathon with lawyer Valentin Rybin, who represented the interests of the family of Vladimir Eremin, who was brutally murdered by Fedorchuk in March 2017.
Deceased Vladimir Eremin
“P.N.”: Valentin, it is clear that the active position of the injured party’s lawyers played an important role. But it’s worth mentioning how the prosecutor worked. After all, he showed uncompromisingness and professionalism, which people have already lost the habit of in such situations.
V.R.: Of course, the prosecutor's work here is clearly outstanding. This is Mikhail Savateev.
After the case moved from the Druzhkovo City Court to the Kramatorsk City Court in 2019, the prosecutor also changed. Savvateev represented this case in the Kramatorsk court from the very beginning. His position was expressed in his strong defense of the need for prompt consideration of proceedings. During the investigation of this case, he petitioned the court four times to change the preventive measure against Fedorchuk and to remove him from office.
He conducted interrogations of witnesses and gave appropriate explanations about the traffic of telephone connections.
That is, in this case, we see that Mikhail Savvateev did an excellent job as a prosecutor.
Our prosecutor represents a public prosecution. Therefore, as a representative of the victims, I could only help the prosecution prove the guilt of the killers. It is clear that on my part I did everything possible. And the prosecutor and I were in fairly close contact: we communicated and discussed positions. This is a case where the prosecution is sympathetic to the victims' side, listens to their representative and understands what steps need to be taken in the process.
Now, perhaps, we should also say about the lawyer with whom you represented the interests of the victims?
This is my colleague Olga Golovina. She is quite young, but a very promising lawyer, very smart and qualified. Since 2017, she and I have been working together on many cases, including politically motivated ones. Naturally, her merit here is very significant.
Did you feel any pressure from that side? Were there any attempts to influence the course of the process? Were there any hints sent? Have you received any suggestions to reduce activity, etc.?
No. If we are talking about any influence on me as a representative of the victims, this was not the case. Because Fedorchuk’s guilt is obvious, which was established and proven four years ago following a pre-trial investigation.
Even the SBU cannot deny this obvious fact. And all they did was simply not remove Fedorchuk from service, giving him the opportunity to continue working. And most importantly: in March 2021, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel.
Even when I was the representative of the victim, neither the Security Service of Ukraine, nor its head Bakanov, nor Venediktova responded in any way to our messages and appeals. That is, there was a clear signal: guys, if you defeat Fedorchuk there, well, let’s pretend that we didn’t notice it; but it is indicative to remove him, or not give him growth, etc. we will not.
The counterintelligence department is headed by the same people who were there in 2017, when this murder was committed. Therefore, they covered Fedorchuk very clearly. There was only one answer to our multiple appeals: here, in accordance with Article 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine, we cannot consider Fedorchuk guilty; so you work there, and he will continue to serve.
When the verdict was announced, it was a big surprise. And, I think, for the SBU as well.
In September 2020, did witness Konin (one of the two soldiers who accompanied Fedorchuk on the night of the murder) simply recant his testimony? What moves and approaches were they looking for?
Yes, probably some events were held. But this, most likely, was the initiative of Fedorchuk himself. It’s just that Konin works in the judicial security service, in Tarashcha, it seems. He was closer to access here, since Fedorchuk also worked in Kyiv. Perhaps he came, talked, and established some contacts.
But what did this give to Konin? Criminal proceedings have been initiated against him for giving deliberately false testimony in court. We will see this through to the end. And I think he will get his three years too. We don't stop. Regarding Konin, we will do everything to ensure that he understands...
After all, the second witness, Potapov, gave testimony that corresponds to reality. He also gave them during pre-trial. At the stage of the pre-trial investigation, there were also investigative experiments in which both witnesses participated. Everything was shown on the video. Potapov and Konin were questioned in court under Article 225 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
At the pre-trial, each of them stood on the podium in the courthouse in front of the judge, the prosecutor, Fedorchuk and his lawyer - and testified. And then Konin showed everything as it was.
And last September he decided to play the role of a weak-minded idiot. In the courtroom he began to tell some nonsense, that someone was putting pressure on him, that he was being psychologically, morally broken, that during pre-trial he said what the investigators told him. Well, nonsense.
Nothing succeeded. Fedorchuk stopped by. And Konin will follow him. And no matter what it takes, I will get a guilty verdict for him too. Because there are no problems with proof here at all. So Konin faces the same fate as Fedorchuk, only with a milder sanction.
What explains Ombudsman Lutkovskaya’s interest in witnesses Konin and Potapov? What prompted her statement about abuse of power by law enforcement officials in relation to these witnesses? Was it used in the dark? I just don’t understand what’s what in this matter?
According to Lutkovskaya, this is how I imagine this situation. She received a request for an inspection. She signed this appeal and initiated this check. And then a representative of the office of the Verkhovna Rada Commissioner for Human Rights went to the territory of the Donetsk region and collected some materials.
But clearly in this case we are observing the fact that Valeria Lutkovskaya did not understand the situation. That is, she acted directly as a mechanism of well-established influence, having certain powers, excuse the pun, of the Commissioner of the Verkhovna Rada.
They initiated a criminal case for abuse of power by police officers based on the alleged statements of Konin and Potapov, and carried out a certain check. In the end, nothing was installed. And this criminal case, naturally, was closed.
But, nevertheless, this gave the SBU the opportunity to the last...
...treasuring Fedorchuk?
I recently came across a secret analytical report on this case, which the Service issues in order to resolve some of its issues there. And it was written there that the apparatus of the Authorized Verkhovna Rada initiated an investigation, and that a criminal case was opened, and that Konin and Potapov were under the influence of the police, who, allegedly, thus wanted to take revenge on the Security Service for the fact that one of the police officers seemed would have been detained under some incomprehensible circumstances.
But this is such nonsense! Because everyone understands what is happening, but, nevertheless, they invent some stories, some fairy tales in order to believe in them themselves.
The very fact that the local police nevertheless searched for and found the killer and showed some kind of integrity and qualifications is noteworthy.
Look what the situation is like. As both the mother of the murdered Volodya Eremina and his friends (witnesses who were interrogated by the prosecution) told me, in 2017 people disappeared quite often in Avdeevka. There, both the volunteer battalions and the SBU did what they wanted. People were not considered people.
And therefore, when Volodya did not return home, my mother did not wait three days or a week, but immediately, the next day, contacted the police. Because nothing like this happened with my son before. And the very next day, proceedings were initiated and operational measures began to be carried out.
This is why I say that in this case technology played an important role. It was established that the deceased’s phone was used by one of the witnesses. But the body could not be found for a whole week. And the servicemen, quite by accident, while combing the area and conducting reconnaissance after redeployment, came across a corpse.
And after the corpse was discovered on March 10, the very next day Konin and Potapov gave testimony. That is, everything was done there very quickly. And they gave testimony that was later confirmed by technical aspects. That is, the witnesses told how and where they went, who Fedorchuk called, and what time it was. And the investigation received access to telephone connections only three months later. We went to Kyiv and received this information, and it really confirmed the testimony of Konin and Potapov.
Well, and then a very important point - this is a medical examination. She established that the genetic material found in the car in which Fedorchuk and the witnesses were driving around belongs to Volodya Eremin. And also mixed DNA of Volodya Eremin was found on Fedorchuk’s shoes.
What to talk about? Everything was clear from the very beginning. But, nevertheless, the authorities tried to drag out this process and make it uninteresting to anyone.
Failed…
The trial went neither shaky nor slow in the Druzhkovsky court, where there was another prosecutor. Meetings were scheduled, but someone didn’t show up or something else, and they were postponed. I want to note the glaring point that Fedorchuk participated via video conferencing.
That is, they did everything possible to relax this process so that it would never end.
That is why in 2019, as soon as I got involved, I set a task for myself: to do everything to ensure that the judiciary quickly considers this proceeding. Well, and, accordingly, for the prosecutor to provide evidence. And so that Fedorchuk doesn’t watch himself on TV, but comes to the courtroom and listens to the materials.
During the debate, you reminded the court of testimony about how on March 3, 2017, shortly before the murder of Eremin, Major Fedorchuk tortured during interrogation another person, stabbing him with a knife.
Yes, we know about this from the words of witness Potapov. He spoke these words during the pre-trial investigation under the protocol.
And now I understand why Fedorchuk went to the location in the evening to drink with Konin and Potapov. He probably wanted to somehow relax them after what they saw. Potapov said: “We were shocked how he dealt with this separatist.”
But what kind of person he was, what his future fate is, it is unlikely that we will ever know.
What were the sentiments of the local residents with whom you spoke on this topic? There was some kind of support group for Eremin’s family. Few of them believed in Fedorchuk’s imprisonment?
I communicated quite closely with a friend of the deceased. Essentially, he invited me into this business and asked for help. And I saw several people who brought Volodya Eremin’s mother to the court hearing.
Well, it’s clear that people are outraged by this glaring fact. Many people knew Volodya Eremin in Avdeevka. They were quite determined about this process.
After all, all normal people, who understand that only the law can protect them, count and hope for an adequate reaction from the court in such a situation. If a person has committed a crime and it is proven in court, then he must be punished. But we know that now the Ukrainian government can do anything: find a person guilty and at the same time leave him free. Or maybe he will be acquitted based on obvious signs.
And until the judges finished announcing the verdict, I didn’t know at all what would happen. I thought they would find me guilty, but perhaps leave me free. Because I assumed that the services somehow influenced the process.
But I must say that I admire the decisiveness and clear position of the judges, who read the verdict for four hours, writing down everything that was examined. And I am quite satisfied with what happened on July 1st.
What's next? From what sides will there be appeals?
We will appeal. We believe that the sentence is lenient. We will not appeal the factual circumstances. However, both the prosecutor and we asked for a life sentence for Fedorchuk. We have the opportunity to appeal the verdict regarding the imposed punishment.
The accused may also appeal. And I'm sure this appeal will be filed. Because the person “left” for 12 years. He was taken into custody in the courtroom. He is now in a pre-trial detention center. The only illusory possibility now of getting freedom back is to repeat Sternenko’s path.
And many are already talking about this: Fedorchuk will now be released on appeal. No! They won’t release him on appeal, because he was convicted and found guilty of committing murder, and not of robbery for three hundred hryvnia (there’s probably something else in the Sternenko case, but I’m not in that material, so I can’t comment on it).
But I clearly tell you that in order to change the preventive measure for the murderer (who was recognized as such at the first instance), the Donetsk Court of Appeal (located in Artemovsk) must find such violations of the process and the lack of factual evidence that will actually lead to the reversal of the sentence in the future or mitigation of punishment. But still, the minimum punishment for murder is 10 years.
The man is convicted. Although the verdict has not yet entered into legal force, the preventive measure chosen is detention. The court gave Fedorchuk 12 years, absolutely confident that he committed a crime and it was proven in the manner prescribed by law.
When people say that this is “Sternenko’s option” and that Fedorchuk will be released soon, this only makes me even more eager to show the judges and in the appeal that the troika of the Kramatorsk City Court did everything right. Therefore, I will continue to support the interests of the victims in the appeal.
And your conversation with Fedorchuk after he was loaded into the paddy wagon - what was that? Trolling?
In fact, it was supposed to look like compassion for a person who is visiting a prison. As a lawyer, I have had many trials when people were given a preventive measure or the measure of detention in the form of detention was extended, and they left the courtroom for a pre-trial detention center, and the living conditions there were quite cruel. There, both water and food are always needed.
And, given the fact that Fedorchuk’s defense attorney was not present at the announcement of the verdict, he did not deign to appear—naturally, I offered both water and food. But at the very last moment, when I told him “will you think about your behavior?”, it was truly from the heart.
This is the least I can do for a man who is accused of the terrible, brutal murder of another person, absolutely innocent. Therefore, let him sit and think about his behavior. There are absolutely no attempts to tease him in any way. He begins to receive his reward.
This case showed that billing and technical expertise related to phone activity matter. But it was possible to help the investigation by wiretapping the defendant’s mobile devices already during the trial in order to add some evidence? The SBU resorts to wiretaps, hacking of correspondence, etc. Moreover, this is done in very dubious criminal proceedings.
If we are talking about cases in which I took part, under Articles 109, 110, 111, this is the jurisdiction of the SBU. They have their own investigative department, they generally do whatever they want. They just feel absolutely accountable to no one and under no control.
And my phones were tapped, linking me to other objects that were in development. I get into the social circle of this object - and they listen to me, write to me. Not only that, but then they also tried to insert these wiretaps into the case materials.
This was in the Department of the SBU of the Dnepropetrovsk region. Absolutely frostbitten. This is a direct violation of the law. It must be stopped immediately. And the people who do this must be held accountable. It is prohibited both by law and by instructions to wiretap a lawyer! But, nevertheless, this happens with all sails.
And in the same way in other cases where SBU investigators work, there is complete chaos, believe me. Even if later they don’t show or tell you what they listened to, they still do it. They listen, they watch, they watch. They motivate their behavior: we are defending our homeland - we don’t care what you say about the laws, because we are now in a war, ATO, etc.
Article 115 in the case of Fedorchuk was the jurisdiction of the police. The Avdiivka police department dealt with this and initiated criminal proceedings. But then, when they found Fedorchuk and it was necessary to detain him, to authorize his arrest, the military prosecutor’s office took over the case, which was also involved in further investigation. And its employees behave more modestly than the SBU on the periphery, in the regions. Young investigators, young prosecutors, adequate ones, simply did their job. And they carried it out so well that the court locked up the killer for 12 years.
Although I believe that I could have closed it for a longer period.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.