Vladimir Plahotniuc fled the country and feels fine where he is, but the persons featured in the case of the attempt on his life have been in remand detention since April 2017. The case is now being reexamined. Moreover, in the last hearing, the main witness Iurie Parhomenko modified his depositions so that these demolish the accusations made against the “Zabolotnyi group”, the lawyers for the culprits stated in a news conference at IPN.
The main witness for the prosecution, Yuri Parhomenco, told the judges that he maintains his accusatory depositions only because he is in the custody of those who forced him to do particular things. He will not modify them as he fears he will be killed when he returns to his cell, said his lawyer Vladimir Curmeli. The prosecutors asked to interrupt the hearing so as to interrogate Parhomenco again. Yuri Parhomenko “testified” against the “Zabolotnyi group” after he was subject to physical and moral pressure. Instead of 72 hours, he was held in the remand prison for three months and was moved from cell to cell where he was being subject to threats. This made Parhomenko sign the proposed text.
Speaking about other deviations, the lawyer said the accusations against the “Zabolotnyi group” are based only on the depositions of one “witness”, the proofs of the defense being omitted. Now that he changed his depositions, they fear something can happen to Parhomenko in jail. These and other components of the case enable him to assert that there was no attempt on Vlad Plahotniuc’s life and everything is a frame-up staged in the interests of the oligarch.
“Yuri Parhomenko agrees to be tested on a polygraph and to make truthful statements in court. For the purpose, we need particular conditions. More exactly, he should be freed from detention. As he is in jail, he fears he can be killed if he starts to reveal things and to make statements against those who ordered to fabricate this case,” stated Vladimir Curmeli.
Another lawyer Victor Ceban said that based on the materials of the case, he can say that the collected evidence is false. When the appeal was being examined, Parhomenko informed about the constraints to which he was subjected and the court should have excluded them, but these are the only one mentioned in the case. Therefore, the lawyers fear that the recent interruption in the hearing can be used to make Parhomenko return to his initial position. But only the testimony given in court can be considered authentic.
For his part, lawyer Ivan Dimov said that the case in the ordinary court and in the Appeals Court was treated as exceptional and the evidence or the depositions of the so-called witness Yuri Parhomenko and of the “agents under cover” – Ukrainian citizens who cooperated with the intelligence services of Ukraine - was admitted in an exceptional way. “I want to note that all these “agents under cover” earlier served time in jail for extremely serious crimes, such as murders, thefts and others. Their names are not made known and their faces are not shown, while the Supreme Court of Justice mentioned the importability and low credibility of the depositions given by these,” he stated.
ladimir Plahotniuc fled the country and feels fine where he is, but the persons featured in the case of the attempt on his life have been in remand detention since April 2017. The case is now being reexamined. Moreover, in the last hearing, the main witness Iurie Parhomenko modified his depositions so that these demolish the accusations made against the “Zabolotnyi group”, the lawyers for the culprits stated in a news conference at IPN.
The main witness for the prosecution, Yuri Parhomenco, told the judges that he maintains his accusatory depositions only because he is in the custody of those who forced him to do particular things. He will not modify them as he fears he will be killed when he returns to his cell, said his lawyer Vladimir Curmeli. The prosecutors asked to interrupt the hearing so as to interrogate Parhomenco again. Yuri Parhomenko “testified” against the “Zabolotnyi group” after he was subject to physical and moral pressure. Instead of 72 hours, he was held in the remand prison for three months and was moved from cell to cell where he was being subject to threats. This made Parhomenko sign the proposed text.
Speaking about other deviations, the lawyer said the accusations against the “Zabolotnyi group” are based only on the depositions of one “witness”, the proofs of the defense being omitted. Now that he changed his depositions, they fear something can happen to Parhomenko in jail. These and other components of the case enable him to assert that there was no attempt on Vlad Plahotniuc’s life and everything is a frame-up staged in the interests of the oligarch.
“Yuri Parhomenko agrees to be tested on a polygraph and to make truthful statements in court. For the purpose, we need particular conditions. More exactly, he should be freed from detention. As he is in jail, he fears he can be killed if he starts to reveal things and to make statements against those who ordered to fabricate this case,” stated Vladimir Curmeli.
Another lawyer Victor Ceban said that based on the materials of the case, he can say that the collected evidence is false. When the appeal was being examined, Parhomenko informed about the constraints to which he was subjected and the court should have excluded them, but these are the only one mentioned in the case. Therefore, the lawyers fear that the recent interruption in the hearing can be used to make Parhomenko return to his initial position. But only the testimony given in court can be considered authentic.
For his part, lawyer Ivan Dimov said that the case in the ordinary court and in the Appeals Court was treated as exceptional and the evidence or the depositions of the so-called witness Yuri Parhomenko and of the “agents under cover” – Ukrainian citizens who cooperated with the intelligence services of Ukraine - was admitted in an exceptional way. “I want to note that all these “agents under cover” earlier served time in jail for extremely serious crimes, such as murders, thefts and others. Their names are not made known and their faces are not shown, while the Supreme Court of Justice mentioned the importability and low credibility of the depositions given by these,” he stated.
