The Third Pre-hearing Ended up with Appointing the Forth and the Last One
On March 29, 2010 the third pre-hearing in Anastasia Denisova's case took place in Leninsky district court of Krasnodar.
«The judge has not yet granted our petition to send the indictment back to the prosecutor, in spite of the multitude of mistakes in it – says Anastasia Denisova. We think that investigator Ignatenko entrusted computer expertize to Pleten', but actually the expert advice was performed by another person – Voevodin, though neither my laywer nor I was informed about it. Today the head of NGO “Soyuz Kriminalistov” (Union of Criminalists) Oleg Pleten' has been questioned. Pleten' announced that he, as the head of NGO “Union of Criminalists”, had entrusted computer expertize to Yuri Voyevodin. If this is true, then it is not clear why Ignatenko had informed Voyevodin about the responsibility for false evidence. This is a violation of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code.
“At one of the screen shots you can see that the date when the file was opened is February 5, 2010, while the expert advice was officially finished on January 27, 2010. This is the the vivid sign that there was an unlawful access to the computers”, - says Denisova. Oleg Pleten' stated that “this might have been the system failure or some battery had run out”.
Denisova and her lawyer point out mess with dates and places of an alleged crime in the criminal case. Ignatenko, the investigator of Denisova's case, witnessed that he did not remember the exact address of the place, where computers had been seized. And the mess with numbers and places can be explained by “technical mistakes”.
Expert Voyevodin failed to report to the pre-hearing, though he had been summoned twice. The judge appointed the forth pre-hearing in order to question Voyevodin on March 31, 2010 at 11 a.m. The judge underlined that the forth pre-hearing would be the last one, because he had to decide when to appoint the first open hearing.
Anastasia Denisova still hopes that the judge will not appoint an open hearing, because the indictment is vividly raw and permeated with controversies. At this moment no public appeal to Microsoft on behalf of Human Rights Center “Memorial”, Transparency International – Russia and other institutions was answered.