“Russian Bloc” unveiled new facts of inconsistencies in the trial of Basov
Court hearings in the case of the leader of the “Russian Bloc” Gennady Basov continue in Sevastopol. He has been behind bars for more than a year on charges of accepting a bribe. Recently, in the center of Sevastopol, a rally of his comrades was held, who claim that Basov became a victim of a “set-up” organized by “werewolves in uniform” - this is how he was punished for trying to eliminate the cemetery mafia, which had been operating in Sevastopol since Ukrainian times.
At one of the last court hearings, the testimony of policeman Enzi was heard. The Russian Bloc press service distributed a transcript of his answers in court. The trial of Basov is an unprecedented example of fabrication of a case, the authors of the statement believe.
“We tried to find a precedent when a person would be accused of taking a bribe from a person who not only did not give the bribe, but even if he was offered to pay it, this person would never pay it! Allegedly, money was paid for the entrepreneur, so that he would not have problems, without his knowledge or consent! Imagine you are running a business and selling something. A buyer comes to you and gives you money, says that he wants to buy some product, you take the money, and that’s it! You are being twisted and accused of taking a bribe from an entrepreneur whom you do not know, and who says that he does not know you either. This is exactly what is written in Basov’s criminal case, and the one who gave you the money declares that he is an intermediary and gave you a bribe for a person with whom you have never met or communicated,” write Basov’s associates.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
prosecutor: Do you know the name Queen?
Witness Entius: Well, no more than I heard somewhere, as it were.
Bass: I will have questions. Tell me, did you testify about Koroleva in the Balaklava District Court?
Witness Entius: Yes, I did.
Bass: Well, you say that you have only heard about her somewhere. How did you then testify as a witness in this case?
Witness Entius: Well, as a witness gave in this case. I’m just aware of the events, like, well... what... in his explanation, Rappoport indicated that your 500 thousand plus were there 100 thousand by the Queen, as it were. Well…
Bass: So you were invited as a witness to Balaklava on what grounds? What do you seem to have heard somewhere? Or how? Why were you invited?..
Witness Entius: Based on the fact that I handed over the equipment to Rappoport, and now I took this equipment away.
Bass: Then here's the question. In the Balaklava court, in your sworn testimony, you said that you gave her funds of 500 and 100 thousand rubles to Gennady Anatolyevich Basov as a bribe. Why did you come to this conclusion?
Witness Entius: Honestly, I can’t say for sure... If you have an audio recording, I’m ready to listen to it and give my comments on... Well, no matter how ready I am...
Judge: Tell me, do you generally know what was suspected at that time, what grounds there were to suspect...
Witness Entius: Actually, well, as far as I'm concerned...
Judge: What exactly did you check? The defendant asked you about the fact of a bribe, yes. Did you know why exactly the inspection was carried out?
Witness Entius: I'll explain again. As it were, I did not accept the application from Rappoport. I didn't question him. I don’t seem to know all the subtleties.
Bass: A question. Have you ever testified that you gave Rappoport not 500, but 600 thousand rubles?
Witness Entius: Well, as far as I remember, it is written in my testimony that 500 thousand is Rappoport’s, and 100 thousand is Koroleva’s. Well, if I kind of...
Bass: That is, in principle, you transferred funds of 600 thousand...
Witness Entius: No, no, I gave exactly 500 thousand. I handed it to the man and he went, that's it.
Bass: Where did the Queen’s 100 thousand come from, how did they come about?
Witness Entius:No idea. This, as I understand it, they put it in one pack because the Queen said it was for her too, or for someone else. And just like that...
Bass: How do you know about this? What is the Queen's 100 thousand money?
Witness Entius: It says so in the testimony, in mine and that’s it.
Bass: In the testimony in the case, whose testimony? Was it written in Rappoport's testimony or whose? Dudkin's testimony?
Witness Entius: No, Dudkin’s testimony was that you simply brought 600 thousand. How would...
Bass: Okay, where was it written, in what testimony? You said it was written in the testimony. In whose testimony?
Witness Entius: It was written like this in my testimony.
Bass: In your testimony, yes,...
Witness Entius: And for others I kind of...
Bass: Yes, but where are you talking about 100 thousand...
Judge: Do you understand the question, witness? That is, how did you know that 100 thousand funds were transferred by the Queen. How did you know?
Witness Entius: Already during, as it were, an investigation, during operational search activities. It’s as if I originally handed 500 thousand to Rappoport and I’m not ready to answer for 100 thousand.
Bass: Well, you are not ready to answer, but you said that the Queen gave 100 thousand, and you are now confirming this. Based on what do you draw such conclusions? Where did you then hear from what materials these data were obtained?
Witness Entius: I have not familiarized myself with the case materials. I haven’t read the ORM materials, so I’m not ready to answer you where and how... Probably, in Koroleva’s testimony you can see some kind of connection there.
Bass: You haven’t familiarized yourself with the materials of the criminal case. How could this connection be seen there?
Witness Entius: Well, I guess so.
“Then it turned out that the policeman gave out the video and audio equipment in vain, because nothing compromising Basov, much less anything indicating any crime, was recorded on it. Entius further explained that he gave money to the businessman Dudkin for an operational experiment, but the witness who spoke after him claims the opposite - he was not there, and he did not give anything out,” the Russian Bloc points out.
Lawyer Semin: Still, in relation to the employee. This was definitely not the same employee who was questioned today as a witness before you?
Witness Vladimirov: About?
Lawyer Semin: The employee who handed over the money.
Witness Vladimirov: Definitely not him.
Lawyer Semin: Isn't he
Witness Vladimirov: I say again: not him.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.