06/30/2017 Published in Grani.ru (copy)
The author’s publications about this process were awarded the independent journalism award “Editorial Board”.
All defendants were found guilty by the jury.
I spent eight months delving into this matter, sitting at meetings. I tried to guess what the jury was thinking. Hardly half of the materials that lawyers and the prosecution argued about without them in court were brought to them. The judge decides what to show to the jury – in my opinion, he often declared very important documents inadmissible. I managed to get hold of many case materials that were not even mentioned in court. But a clear impression of the degree of guilt of the defendants did not develop. And in general about how this murder happened.
Over time, from a huge amount of information, it was possible to isolate what could be accepted as reliably known facts. There were very few of them.
There were pairs of “secret pipes” that worked for a very short time each. Two such pairs are known, and most likely there were more. One of these tubes accidentally led to Anzor Gubashev. This connection seems to me rather shaky.
Anzor Gubashev and Beslan Shavanov (the rich experience of working with video suggests that they were most likely) walked on the day of the murder near Nemtsov’s house, along Red Square and Trubnikovsky, where they left the ZAZ. Most likely, a man who ran out from behind a snow blower immediately after the murder left at ZAZ.
On Dadaev, traces of the products of the shot were found. However, the same ones were found on unknown clothes in Shadid Gubashev’s car, and Dadaev was a military man and often shot.
An independent study of the case materials did not add much, more often the information contradicted the versions of the investigation.
Video recordings
The camera recording at Dadaev’s entrance says that he was most likely at home at the time of the murder. Together with the defendants, a lot of unknown or put out of business people come to the apartments on Veernaya. The jury didn’t see any of this.
Phone billing
We analyzed it with our colleague Daria Kostromina. Only Anzor Gubashev almost completely “falls” into the version of surveillance. Pauses in the connections of his legal number correspond to the periods of operation of “secret pipes” near Nemtsov’s house. The rest of the defendants (including Dadaev) do not fall in any way (although the prosecutor argued the opposite in the debate). True, once one of the “secret pipes” coincides in place on B. Yakimanka with the presence of Dadaev and Ruslan Geremeev nearby in the President Hotel (Geremeev often visited there).
At the time of the murder (from 21:48 to midnight), the numbers of Ruslan Geremeev known to us are “silent”. As well as Dadaev’s number (and the investigation did not check his correspondence via home WiFi).
Almost all the defendants and many others (Geremeevs, Khataev) call Mukhudinov – the calls are one-time and short, his Mercedes rides all over Moscow. One gets the impression that he was called as a driver. Such is the “customer” looms.
Ruslan and Artur (his younger relative) Geremeev call up Dadaev after the murder, Ruslan also calls Shavanov when he flies to Grozny on March 28.
Artur Geremeev talks to many people involved.
Billing was generally brought to the attention of the jury, but the prosecution tried to minimize the information and interpreted it in a rather arbitrary way. For example, assuming the presence of a person in one place, but not taking into account that the next connection he has is at the other end of Moscow, which cannot be reached in 10 minutes.
ZAZ car and Potok system
Biological traces of Shavanov, Gubashev and Dadaev were found in ZAZ. When and under what circumstances they were left is unknown.
Obviously, it was not Dadaev who bought ZAZ – he was in Grozny that day. It is not clear even when, by whom and for what purpose it was actually bought and used. Until February (according to investigators, ZAZ was bought to spy on Nemtsov on October 20) the car drove around randomly all over Moscow. And although during this time ZAZ is fined five times for parking near Nemtsov’s house, in some other places it is fixed even more often. But since February, the car starts to drive strictly along one route: Matveevskoye – Kutuzovsky – Kyiv railway station. Where to go next is unknown (only on the day of the murder and the day before she is noticed following Nemtsov’s Range Rover). And parking fines stop. It seems that the car was used for a variety of things, but in February the purpose and driver changed.
My own conclusions
If I had a personal opinion about the involvement of some of the defendants in the murder, it was not because of official evidence, but because of their behavior after the murder and during the trial.
If I divided the defendants into groups, it would be different than the prosecutors. In the next three days, everyone left Moscow (including both Geremeevs), except for Bakhaev and Eskerkhanov. The latter came to live in Geremeev’s apartment on Veernaya. They talk about him as a close person. But I don’t know how much of an idiot you have to be in order to settle in the main “raspberry” after a general flight. If you know, of course, that it is “raspberry”. Eskerkhanov also served in the police for many years. I don’t believe he was aware or understood what was going on.
In court, the Gubashev brothers behaved most inconsistently – they changed versions and testimony, vaguely hinted at the “Ukrainian trace”, and could not clearly explain some of their actions. You can’t say the same about the rest. But they also stated that they were tortured and the investigator obtained confessions fraudulently.
It seems that many more people participated in the case than sat on the dock. On the day and night of the murder, at least six people, except for the defendants, visited the apartments on Veernaya Street. Telephone connections of defendants with many other people were also not considered, and the jury does not know about them.
Even the whole of Chechnya could know about the murder. Today, failure to report an impending murder would be a crime only if Nemtsov were recognized as a “state or public figure.” But the court refused to do so.
In my opinion, no evidence was presented of Eskerkhanov and Bakhaev’s participation in the crime (except for the video with Nemtsov swearing at Putin on Eskerkhanov’s phone). I will not say anything about Dadaev, although there is a feeling of his involvement. But feeling is not evidence.
The prosecution presented a completely implausible picture of the murder. It could be anything but the presented version. And I’m surprised the jury didn’t see that.
Ethnic moment
The ethnic specificity in this case was clearly underestimated, and a lot is connected with it. Prosecutor Semenenko: “Even if Mukhudinov was Dadaev’s personal chauffeur, he could still order Nemtsov’s murder.” No, Maria Eduardovna, in Chechnya I could not!
Couldn’t the “boss” walk like Mukhudinov, with mincing steps, open the door in front of his “subordinates” and carry bags (this can be seen on the recordings of the access cameras on Veernaya).
They told the youngest Shadid Gubashev to go to Chechnya by car after everyone else, and he went. They said to meet Shavanov at the airport – met. Just like he went every day through half the region to visit his old uncle, because he “was bored.” Maybe Shadid came up with this to justify some of his movements, but in his eyes such an explanation is completely logical, but for us it is not.
I cannot understand much in this story – I am not a Chechen.
The most interesting thing now is the reaction to the outcome of the trial
Before, I met several variants of attitude to the matter among people “socially close” to me.
1. “You can’t let them go, because after that Kadyrov will feel complete impunity and we will all be killed.”
2. “All Kadyrovites are enemies of progressive humanity, and the more they are imprisoned, the better.”
3. “With regard to us (the opposition, the intelligentsia), no one bothers with the law. This means that we can neglect it if we are talking about our enemies who killed our friend.”
4. “Everything, as always, was blamed on the Chechens, and the killer is in the Kremlin.”
There are also exotic opinions, such as the one expressed by Ilya Yashin after the verdict: “Despite the serious pressure on the jury, they withstood and convicted the guilty.” Well-known persons, as usual, operate with general words, without any difficulty in substantiating them, and there more – comprehending them.
Surely a wave of discussions will again swept over who the customer is: Putin or Kadyrov. They can remember the role of Anna Duritskaya or the State Department (they still feel that something is wrong with this court).
One thing is unlikely to interest many: Justice. But it was an ordinary trial of alleged criminals. But Gleb Zheglov is still alive in our hearts. I remember how after the Manezh case, when the National Bolsheviks were deliberately imprisoned, who had nothing to do with the performance of football fans, I warned my liberal colleagues: “Soon they will do the same to you.” A year later, the Bolotnoye case took place. But then, in 2011, the comrades-in-arms only staged a protest rally against nationalism, without noticing a specific verdict.
Well, now we recognize Bakhaev as a political prisoner?
In the photo: Nemtsov family lawyer Vadim Prokhorov and lyricist Dmitry Borko at the door of the Moscow District Military Court, where the trial took place