Приговор при свечах / Judgment in candlelight - Владимир Анатольевич Арсентьев

The officer on duty led Musin to the office and left him to sit there and think for a while. The arrestee found himself in front of a safe with a composite sketch pinned on it, depicting a serial killer wanted in the locality with a list of all his crimes. Lucky that Musin could read – he learned a lot about himself! However, the sketch was made for the record – or for show, which is almost the same. After thoroughly examining the image, Musin questioned its authenticity, because he had strangled everyone who had seen him, except for Mrs. Yasny. The evil murderer on the portrait had no resemblance to him whatsoever. Musin even carefully examined his face in the mirror: no, it’s not the man with a beastly scowl on the portrait. I don’t look like him, decided Musin.

Meanwhile, the operative returned to the room and suggested that Musin confess to the crimes listed on the composite sketch. The offender replied that there was nothing he could confess to, as he wasn’t guilty of anything. Among the unsolved crimes “matched” to Musin, there were two with biological evidence identical to Musin’s samples. Musin energetically denied his involvement in these murders, too. He even wondered why the law enforcement wasn’t looking for the killer on the composite sketch – a particular dangerous criminal – and informed the prosecutor that they weren’t doing their job.

In this complex way, the case reached the court. A shaggy, beast-like creature with an unkempt face of a yeti was brought to trial. Only the eyes were glaring at the judge. However, the president of the court did not rush to establish the defendant’s identity based on the expression in his eyes. Instead, he searched the case file for a document that would help him. He found a notice of release from prison, though without a photo. The judge asked Musin where the photo might be. The defendant, not denying ownership of the document, answered – remaining seated – that the photo fell off and got lost.

Note that the judge had more murder cases pending, including one where a victim came alive among the dead bodies during the scene inspection – the corpses were taken out to the country and thrown onto a frozen river in hopes of the upcoming ice drift. The judge proposed that the prosecutor commit the defendant for trial in proper condition and with a valid ID.

The request was implemented faithfully in prison. Musin appeared before the court with his head and face shaved clean. The new photo of the defendant was marked with an official seal that confirmed his identity.

During the closed proceedings, defendant Musin saw that the trial was fair. Answering the questions of the presiding judge, he pleaded guilty and told the truth about his acts for the first time. The court verdict pronounced Musin guilty of many grave and particularly grave offenses associated with rape and murder. He was sentenced to long-term imprisonment in a high security penal colony, with part of the sentence to be served in prison. The court verdict duly entered into force and was executed.

Chapter II: the power of law vs. тhe law of power

2.1. The Gloomy River

Pavel Novgorodtsev (1866–1924), lawyer, philosopher, and founder of the “idealist school of law,” believed that life of dignity as an idea leaves room for infinite demands and recommendations empowered by the infinite human ideal. However, when we speak of the right to a life of dignity, it means not the positive content of the human ideal but the negation of any condition that would wholly eliminate the possibility of a life of dignity. In the same way we approach the right to freedom of thought and religious conscience – meaning the negation of any external hindrances for the spirit. However, we acknowledge that this is not the only prerequisite to positively implement the ideal of internal freedom. It should be ensured that everyone has the opportunity to lead a life of dignity, free from the burden of extreme conditions that destroy people physically and morally.[143] Novgorodtsev tried to prove that the contradiction between personal and societal principles is an impasse. He also demonstrated that jurisprudence often has religious underpinnings.

According to Ivan Ilyin (1883–1954), a prominent legal philosopher and a Russian émigré, spirituality is the essence of law, and keeping the spirit alive is the objective of law: “Spiritual recognition is performed either from the inside – out of personal freedom, in the depth of one’s original spiritual self – or not at all.”[144]

The objective of law is to uphold and preserve human dignity, including personal freedom. One can implement it in practice by recognizing one’s own rights or by providing an opportunity to exercise civil rights in criminal proceedings. This peaceful movement towards recognizing the good – through the union of doctrine and knowledge – is the court’s raison d’être and the way to know the truth.

When the court studies the circumstances of someone’s life and death, it aims to discover that person’s natural right, arising from human nature. The prerequisites of human nature are freedom, equality, and justice, the latter presupposing obligatory retribution for one’s actions, i. e. liability. Therefore, people intuitively recognize their own right to actually choose in favor of exercising their rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests – or to relinquish them instead. By choosing to relinquish them, however, one stifles oneself as an individual and waives one’s internal freedom. This disempowerment gives rise to fear and alienates one from a fulfilling life of happiness and joy. Criminal justice aims to restore the balance.

At the turn of the century in May, the judge got off the plane in the only town on the “Gloomy River” with a baggage of