It's unfortunate that hunting accidents have become common. Almost every week, the media reports on accidents during hunts – either a huntsman, a hunter, or a regular forest visitor dies.
Investigating such cases is complex, as it requires reconstructing the whole murder scene and properly determining the guilt of those involved in the tragic events.
Yesterday, it was reported that the prefect of the Central Administrative District of Moscow, Vladimir Goverdovsky, was involved in a hunt in the Smolensk region where a huntsman was killed. Initially, the shooter was unknown, but later evidence suggested that Goverdovsky fired the fatal shot. Whether the official will be held accountable for the murder or given leniency is being discussed by the Kompromat1 portal.
Chronology of events
Around noon on November 5, reports emerged that an irreparable incident occurred during a hunt involving the prefect of the Central Administrative District of Moscow, Vladimir Goverdovsky. According to official reports, the huntsman violated safety rules by entering the line of fire while the hunters were driving the wild boar. The shot struck the victim. The hunters promptly notified the police and an ambulance was called. Despite efforts to resuscitate the huntsman for two hours, he unfortunately passed away.
Initially, the details of the crime were unclear. However, evidence has since emerged suggesting Goverdovsky's (unintentional) guilt in the murder.
It was later revealed that Goverdovsky went alone to the Vostok base in the Smolensk region to hunt wild boar. Therefore, it is unlikely that someone else could have fired the fatal shot at the huntsman. Interestingly, all sources indicate that Goverdovsky is involved in the criminal case as a witness. There are indications that officials are trying to exonerate Goverdovsky by shifting all the blame onto the deceased huntsman.
Officially, the crime unfolded as follows: Goverdovsky arrived at the Vostok base, changed clothes, and on the evening of November 4, he went into the forest to hunt wild boar with another hunter. After taking position, Goverdovsky allegedly fired a shot at an animal at the hunter's command, but missed. The bullet ricocheted and hit the huntsman, who was behind the boar in the bushes. The huntsman sustained a penetrating wound on the left side of the body, and the bullet became lodged in his chest. The hunter attempted to perform resuscitation, but the huntsman had little chance of survival. The ambulance, which arrived approximately thirty minutes later, also tried to save the victim, but to no avail.
This explanation seems implausible. Firstly, it's unclear why the huntsman was positioned behind the boar, and secondly, there's no explanation as to how the bullet could have ricocheted. As a result, there are more questions than answers.
According to a law enforcement source, things were different. Indeed, Goverdovsky arrived at the Vostok base in the evening of November 04 himself with his personal weapon. After it got dark, the hunter took the client to the fields next to the boar trails. On the spot, a local huntsman was waiting for them on the Trekol all-terrain vehicle (this is an important detail). After talking a little with the huntsman, the hunters went to the observation tower, but on the way, it seemed to Goverdovsky that a wild boar was standing in the dark. He fired two shots without warning, but instead of the sound of hitting an animal, there was a sound of hitting metal. The hunter went to find out what happened, and saw the same all-terrain vehicle “Trekol”, in the hood of which two bullets hit. One bullet lodged in the skin of the vehicle, another ricocheted off the hood and mortally wounded the huntsman. In this scenario, things become completely different. It turns out that Goverdovsky’s fault is much greater than what was described in the official version of the incident.
It all comes down to the fact that they want to make the official a “victim of the situation”, and shift all the blame onto the deceased huntsman. Moreover, he is already dead, he does not care.
Friends from crime
Then the situation played out unexpectedly. As it turned out, Vladimir Goverdovsky repeatedly came to hunt at the Vostok base. Moreover, this happened in a large company, along with other VIP guests from Moscow. The enterprise that owns the land belongs to the son of a scandalous Moscow businessman with a corner past, Pavel Te German.
It is clear that Goverdovsky did not accidentally go hunting to the base of a Moscow entrepreneur who had his own interest in him. Thanks to his close friendship with Goverdovsky, Cho resolved his issues in the Central Administrative District of Moscow.
Still, we do not forget that Goverdovsky has been the prefect for more than 7 years. Not only in his district, but also in cooperation with other Moscow colleagues, he greatly “helps” Cho to develop the business. As far as it is legal – you understand.
Goverdovsky is an important figure in the activities of Cho projects, therefore everything converges to the fact that no one will seriously investigate the case against the official, but the huntsman who was in the wrong place at the wrong time will still be made guilty.
http://vlasti.info/news/52475-kak_pytajutsja_otmazatj_ot_ubijstva_egerja_prefekta_tsao_moskvy_vladimira_goverdovskogo
