3 million euros to Austria for the main witness in the judicial mafia case.
The Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow denied parole to lawyer Alexei Litvinov. Litvinov is a key figure in a very surprising corruption story, which the VChK-OGPU telegram channel found out about. He, being a solver and an intermediary in the transfer of massive bribes, was to become a key figure in one of the largest investigations into corruption in the Kuban. Didn't. Litvinov testified against dozens of judges, officials at both the regional and federal levels, and the then mayor of Sochi, Anatoly Pakhomov. Everything he said was confirmed. However, the materials were abruptly simply buried, having decided to attract only a few “switchmen” according to Pakhomov’s testimony. Only the former deputy heads of Sochi, Anatoly Rykov and Sergei Yurin, turned out to be accused.
Alexey Litvinov
Rucriminal.info continues corruption “story number 1”.
In the court session of the Khamovniki Court of Moscow, the protocol recorded such an “opening statement” to the testimony of A.Yu. Litvinov. as a witness for the prosecution in the vice-mayors’ case: “First of all, I would like to say, since we have not seen each other for a long time, that I regret what happened, and I am sincerely sorry for your loved ones, your relatives, this is really a great shock for your family, for my family.At the same time, I want to say that without wishing you harm, I MADE, I CONSIDER THE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT decision, initially NOT STUDYING THE CASE MATERIALS, without pausing to study them and see what is there, what is not, I decided for myself to cooperate with the investigation, because we all understand very well, everyone present in this hall understands very well that my testimony is truthful, that it is the absolute truth (quote from the testimony of 04/23/2021).
On 06/08/2019, the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation refused to conclude a pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu., as he tried to present himself as an “intermediary”, and not an “organizer” of the scheme for legalizing unauthorized construction objects.
Pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu. was signed on the second attempt, after Litvinov decided to “recognize EVERYTHING that is written in the charge”, namely:
– creation with his participation of the Org. Group in 2010
– on the receipt of a bribe by the group from the developer Stroganov I.A. for LCD “Sofia-Park” and “Marina-Park” at least 150 million rubles.
– about receiving bribes from the developer Klyus V.V. for residential complex “Svetlana-Park” not less than 40 million rubles. and a number of others.
On January 21, 2020, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation established that “the information available in the testimony of Liivinov A.Yu. about A.N. , Uleeva S.N., Borozdina M.S., Shafieva A.Yu.”
The head of the investigation group of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation A.V. Salivonik established that Rykov A.N. received from Stroganov I.A. at least 25 million rubles. for allegedly having the opportunity to influence the trial with the administration of Sochi.
Additionally, the leader of the investigation team at the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation found that Litvinov A.Yu. was given 60 million rubles by Klyus V.V. to expedite the building permit process, without informing Rykov and Yurin.
It is clear from the above that Litvintv A.Yew. is lying in a bold and systematic manner.
The stance of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation, which has not yet taken action in accordance with Art. 317.8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to reconsider the sentence imposed on the defendant with whom a pre-trial cooperation agreement was made, is due to the discovery that the defendant provided false information.
The employees of the Directorate of the Security Service of the FSB of the Russian Federation were completely correct in highlighting the “scheme for commissioning unauthorized buildings in the form of the Marina-Park and Svetlana-Park complexes” in their reports to the department head, Ivan Tkachev.
Rucriminal.info has access to legal documents that formed the basis for recognizing the objects as “commissioned” and acknowledging the developers' ownership of these objects.
Legal documents related to the “Marina-Park” complex:
On 09/09/2015 in case N2-2550/2015, Judge O.A. Didik of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi, ruled in favor of the developer in their dispute against Rosreestr, acknowledging the developer’s ownership of the reconstructed pool building – 4 floors.
On 06/29/2016, in case N 2a – 4990/2016, Judge V.A. Sluka of the central district court of the city of Sochi ruled in favor of the developer in their dispute against the administration of the Krasnodar Territory (Gosstroynadzor), recognizing the Marina-Park complex as being put into operation – 10 floors.
On 03/23/2017, in case N 2-1511 / 2017, Judge V.A. Vlasenko of the Central District Court of Sochi ruled in favor of I.S. Vorobiev in their dispute with the cadastral engineer, acknowledging the need to preserve the building in a reconstructed form and recognizing ownership of the 11th and 12th floors.
Legal documents related to the “Svelana-Park” complex:
1) On 06/13/2019, the Leninsky District Court of Krasnodar ruled in favor of M.A. Kostanovskiy in their dispute with the administration of the Krasnodar Territory, maintaining a 10-storey building in a reconstructed state.
2) On 18.08.2020, Judges N.V. Dunyushkina, D.A. Bashinsky, and Chaban L.N. upheld the decision of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi in case N2-2050/2019 dated 12/20/2019, regarding the preservation of the reconstructed 13-storey building of the complex.
However, inexplicably, the “scheme of legalization of unauthorized construction” mentioned in the reports of the Department K of the SES of the FSB of the Russian Federation was replaced by administrative processes that fundamentally altered the procedure for issuing building permits, leading to an outcome in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Additionally, the authorities at the FSB of the Russian Federation were not informed of this change.
Information about the arrests of the Litvinovs’ property is distorted. Neither the investigation nor the state prosecution found out, within the framework of the pre-trial agreement, information about the whereabouts of the funds, as taken out by Litvinov A.Yu. to Austria (3 million euros and 700 thousand dollars), and withdrawn by him and his father from the accounts already during the investigation. Also, for some reason, the Litvinovs, unlike other defendants, disposed of real estate without any problems, including after the court issued judicial acts on the imposition of arrests.
rucriminal.net
