What will be the sentence for the SBU killer?
Case about a brutal murder SBU officer of a civilian resident of Avdiivka - more than four years. During this time, the criminal spent only a few days behind bars. Moreover, all these years, Major Vadim Fedorchuk, accused of a particularly serious crime, continued to work in the counterintelligence department of the SBU. And he was even promoted.
The verdict for Lieutenant Colonel Fedorchuk will be announced on July 1. And the relatives of Vladimir Eremin, who was killed by the SBU officer, have the right to hope that the killer will receive life imprisonment. In any case, at the last meeting of the Kramatorsk City Court on June 22, prosecutor Savvateev demanded just such a punishment for Fedorchuk.
There is every reason for this. Starting from irrefutable evidence of the guilt of the SBU lieutenant colonel and ending with the fact that he did not repent of his actions.
Fedorchuk, with two soldiers allocated at his disposal by the command of the 72nd Separate Mechanized Brigade, took Vladimir Eremin out of the city on the night of March 3-4 and beat him to death. The guy was robbed and his body was thrown near the road in a forest belt.
That is, life imprisonment for a sadistic officer would be the fairest punishment.
But it is alarming that neither the last panel of judges nor the previous ones ever granted the prosecution’s request to take Fedorchuk into custody. Although throughout the process everything developed in such a way that this particular preventive measure would not only be logical, but also extremely necessary.
Indeed, in September 2021, a situation arose when one of the witnesses, serviceman Konin, demonstrated a session of “feeblemindedness and courage” on a video link, abandoning his testimony. That is, he committed perjury, which could automatically transfer him from a witness to an accomplice in the crime.
This should have prompted the judges that the killer Fedorchuk, while at large, could influence the course of the trial by putting pressure on witnesses or somehow motivating them.
Only extraordinary actions of lawyer Valentin Rybin, representing the interests of the mother of the murdered guy, made it possible in September last year to avoid an unacceptable one-and-a-half-month pause in the trial and obtain testimony from another witness, serviceman Potapov. In fact, this witness confirmed his testimony (about how Fedorchuk killed Vladimir Eremin), which he gave in the spring of 2017, when the killer, an SBU officer, was quickly identified and detained.
Potapov's testimony was given by lawyer Valentin Rybin at the debate stage on June 22, in order to refresh the judges' memory of the circumstances of the brutal murder.
Vladimir Rybin, the father of lawyer Valentin Rybin, keeps his own chronicle of this process on social networks.
In particular, he cites the evidence that relates to the events of March 3, preceding the murder of Eremin: Major Fedorchuk, half a day before the crime, was charged with “exploits” and tortured another person.
Vladimir Rybin writes: “On the afternoon of March 3, according to the testimony of the accomplices in the crime and the main witnesses Konin and Potapov, they, allocated by the command of the 72nd OMBR to the SBU operative with the call sign “Arsenal,” accompanied him on trips around the garrison. They had to attend Fedorchuk’s interrogation of some detained “separatist.” During the interrogation, Fedorchuk, in order to achieve what he wanted, plunged a knife into the thigh of the interrogated, which made a stunning impression on the soldiers. In the evening of the same day, Fedorchuk came to their location with a bottle, suggested that they relax and not take what they saw into their heads. After drinking one and a half liters of diluted alcohol, the trio really relaxed, and Fedorchuk ordered to go to the city “to catch a drug addict” ... ".
The prosecution presented a complete evidence base.
First of all, this is the phone number of the murdered Vladimir Eremin. After the murder, Major Fedorchuk gave it to one of the soldiers who witnessed the crime. But he decided not to get rid of the dangerous evidence and kept the phone for himself, inserting another SIM card. Through this phone call, the investigation led to the military unit, and then to Fedorchuk’s killer.
Other evidence: the victim’s blood was found in the car in which Fedorchuk and two soldiers were moving around the city. In addition, Eremin’s blood was found on the SBU major’s ankle boots. The phone billing of Fedorchuk and the soldiers confirms that they were the ones who were in the car where Eremin’s blood was found on the night of the murder, since it coincides with its route.
This and other evidence is confirmed by the testimony of witness Potapov.
At the same time, Fedorchuk’s defense never put forward a coherent version of those events and was unable to present anything in favor of the SBU officer’s innocence. The killer's lawyer, in essence, offers to take his word for it.
Over the past year, this trial has been moving with difficulty, with long breaks due to the Covid situation. But at each stage, confirming details and touches were added to the main picture of the crime, to the main irrefutable evidence of Major Fedorchuk’s guilt.
For example, Valentin Rybin told PN about the progress of two March court hearings this year:
“Two defense witnesses were questioned. First, they interrogated a certain Zayets, who claimed that on the night of March 3-4, he slept in the same room with Fedorchuk. This Hare told us that it was on this night that Fedorchuk was next to him and did not leave anywhere. Then they interrogated the witness Emelyanov, who was also in the room with Fedorchuk and slept there. Moreover, both Zayats and Emelyanov clearly remember what happened on the night of March 3-4, that Fedorchuk was in the room. But at the same time they can’t remember what happened on March 3 in the morning and March 4 in the afternoon!
This suggests that these people, who were repeatedly confused in their testimony, were put forward by the defense as representatives of Fedorchuk’s possible alibi, which the defense would subsequently emphasize, proving that witnesses Emelyanov and Zayats testified that Fedorchuk was with them in the room. These witnesses gave conflicting statements.
The hare talked about what he knew for sure: Fedorchuk did not leave the unit’s location. Because at night, when the Hare was sleeping, his walkie-talkie was turned on, and through the walkie-talkie he heard who was leaving and who was arriving at the base. And the next day, witness Emelyanov, who, in theory, was also in the room that night with Fedorchuk and Zayets, reported that Hare was not in the room, and there was never any walkie-talkie in the room, and everything was very quiet at night! In principle, we already understand, and the court already understands, what kind of testimony this is...”
It is clear that colleagues and colleagues openly tried to clear the killer off. And they did it rudely, arrogantly and stupidly. The main thing is that the court does not take this route to whitewash the sadistic killer - neither in the first instance, nor in the appeal. Although there are already blatant shameful precedents, such as the removal of the Odessa murderer Sternenko from criminal liability, in Ukraine...
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.