Приговор при свечах / Judgment in candlelight - Владимир Анатольевич Арсентьев

large sum of money on them. The psychopath Kolenko tricked the buyers, telling them that he would drive them to the gold mine. He brought them to a remote place, far from inhabited areas. Then he shot the two men, who were sitting in the closed back of the truck, with a sawed-off shotgun, killing one and injuring the other. He finished off the injured man, repeatedly hitting him on the head with the shotgun and breaking his skull bones. After that, he took the cash. He got rid of the bodies with the help of the driver, Pospeyev, throwing them off the edge of the road at a snow pass. The bodies were accidentally sighted later, when the snow melted away.

Pospeyev concealed the fact that a particularly grave offense had been committed. However, he did so without prior arrangement with the murderer, so he was subject to an amnesty act and exempted from punishment.

Kolenko, however, was punished for murdering two persons for profit and sentenced to long-term imprisonment in a high security penal colony[147].

The proceedings continued. After another trial day, the court convicted Batyev. To bring his verdict into effect, the court had sent Batyev’s criminal case to the prosecutor of the province in sufficient time for further investigation. It was found during the trial that Batyev, who had been previously tried for murder and other crimes, was not acquainted with the facts of the case. He was accused of a murder committed with special cruelty – but his right to defense was violated. The reports were drafted without Batyev and involved lawyer N. who wasn’t his counsel. Lawyer D., Batyev’s legal defender, was not informed about those important procedural activities and did not participate in the investigation, so the court deemed those activities null and void.

We could walk in the shoes of the investigator who broke the code of criminal procedure and infringed on Batyev’s right to defense, or of the prosecutor who approved the indictment and directed the inadequate case to the court. One of the possible reasons was that the accused man had an emotionally unstable psychopathic personality. Batyev’s secondary cranial injuries resulted in increasing affective instability. Therefore, the prosecution had trouble finding common ground with that man, who had served fifteen years in a Soviet high security penal colony.

As the investigation authorities were aware of Batyev’s physical and mental condition, they should have been even more scrupulous regarding the ill man’s right to defense. The investigator and prosecutor could not but take cognizance that in case of his being guilty of murder with aggravating circumstances, Batyev would receive a penalty of no less than what he had already served, with due regard for his particularly dangerous recidivism. Later in the future the court pronounced Batyev sane in regard to the act. However, that required a criminal investigation within a standard criminal procedure.

Meanwhile, to establish the flagrant violations of Batyev’s right to defense and check his claim, the court carried out painstaking work in the course of the trial. The facts of the case were checked and compared with the detainee’s personal file requested from the colony. As a result, the court established the above infringements, withheld by the investigator, irremediable in the trial, and hindering judicial review on the merits.[148]

Nevertheless, state prosecuting attorney K. disagreed with the court decision and filed a special appeal against it. She proposed that the higher court overturn the provincial court decision and that a differently constituted court review Batyev’s case on the merits.

The cassation review was carried out by prosecutor S., a representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office. He suggested that the court decision should be upheld without change, and the appeal of the state prosecuting attorney disallowed.

The Judicial Board on Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation agreed with the court verdict and reasoning. The decision regarding Batyev was left unchanged, and the special appeal was disallowed.[149]

An additional investigation was carried out as requested, and the procedural rights of Batyev were restored and strictly observed from that moment on. After that, the court found the following. Batyev, a miner, discovered that his cash and papers disappeared after a night of heavy drinking in Lisina’s apartment. He beat up Lisina, demanding that she returned his possessions. Not getting his documents and money back, the psychopath wrapped a synthetic scarf around Lisina’s neck and strangled her. He put the body on the bed and covered it with a blanket. Then he waited for Lisina’s daughter to come home and got back his documents, which Lisina had hidden.

The defendant’s story about some strangers strangling Lisina with her own scarf was carefully checked by the court and proven to be false.

Upon motion by the state prosecuting attorney, the qualifying feature of special cruelty was withdrawn from the murder charge.

After making a handwritten draft of the verdict overnight, the judge switched off his desk lamp – but the light didn’t go out. He did not notice how the new day dawn came silently and brought light. The hard worker of justice only had one hour left. The night before, he managed to get a revitalizing hour-and-a-half nap as well as a relaxing long sleep of two hours and a half.

“Dersu noticed that I used to sit the livelong day at the table and write.

“‘Me did think,’ he said. ‘Captain sit so,’ and he made the motion of being seated, ‘eat, judge men, no other work. Now me understand. Captain go mountain… work; come back town… work. Now no-can walk.’[150]

Batyev was convicted for repeated murder and sentenced to long-term imprisonment in a high security penal colony.[151]

As Batyev pleaded not guilty, he appealed against the sentence.

The Judicial Board on Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld Batyev’s verdict and dismissed his cassation appeal.[152]

Two work days later, a