Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

Dmitrichenko, Zarutsky, Lipatov Trial


  • Please log in to reply
120 replies to this topic

#31 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,328 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 08:59 AM

This is not a jury trial:  it is a trial before a judge. To think that a valid defense to the representative of the system is "The system couldn't defend me against the corruption of the theater head, therefore I arranged an illegal attack on him, even though I never went to the police with a stack of evidence against him" does not sound plausible to me.



#32 volcanohunter

volcanohunter

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 10:21 AM

What has never made sense to me is Dmitrichenko taking his stack of evidence to the administration of the Bolshoi Theater on January 16, the day before the attack.

 

I don't understand the discussion of dancers demanding the right to solo roles in a number of different scenarios discussed here.  I thought the prosecutor or the press had raised it, to show a motive for animosity toward Sergei Filin.  However, it seemed tenuous, unless they are suggesting a Nancy Kerrigan type situation.  If you are asking why the defense would raise it, emotional distress could affect the degree of a crime in America.  If one were to demand sexual favors from a man's wife or girlfriend, I can imagine the husband/boyfriend taking serious offense or wanting to protect his girlfriend and responding physically.  The defendant's emotional state would be at issue, and he would need to show why.

 

These issues feature in the police report that is part of the official case. In it the police was theorizing on motives for the attack and its possible perpetrators.

 

If anyone finds this aspect of the case distasteful, please skip over the remainder of this post.

 

Dmitrichenko, Tsiskaridze and Pronin may be involved in committing this crime; in addition, there have been complaints against Filin made by Anzhelina Vorontsova and Annadurdyev. In addition, the victim Filin had intimate relations with Malandina, Natalia Alexandrovna, who was fired at the initiative of the victim as a result of a conflict that arose, as well as with Vinogradova, Maria Viktorovna, and Smirnova, Olga Vyacheslavovna. Conflicts also arose between Filin and [Anton] Getman in the course of their professional activities. Currently Prorvich, Maria Alexandrovna, lives with Filin.

http://izvestia.ru/news/560219



#33 Catherine

Catherine

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 183 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 09:38 PM

Izvestia is pro-Tsiskaridze, and therefore anti-Filin, so take into account the source of who's "producing" the news.



#34 volcanohunter

volcanohunter

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 09:56 PM

That's obvious enough, but I would hope that when court documents or testimony are quoted, they are reproduced accurately.



#35 Catherine

Catherine

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 183 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 11:27 PM

That's obvious enough, but I would hope that when court documents or testimony are quoted, they are reproduced accurately.

Me too. I don't know if they are - I suppose only the courts and those with access to them will know for sure.



#36 solo

solo

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 04:07 AM

That's obvious enough, but I would hope that when court documents or testimony are quoted, they are reproduced accurately.

Me too. I don't know if they are - I suppose only the courts and those with access to them will know for sure.


Dear volcanohunter, I would like to share your hope but I doubt that we will see the perfect trustworthy report of the court hearing.
Agree with the last statement. I noticed that even in the lawyer's personal report online there were omissions of some important information pieces, which popped up in the newpaper reports later. To be fair to the lawyer he admitted himself that he was “short of words to make at least some sort of evaluation of what we hear”.

#37 puppytreats

puppytreats

    Gold Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 751 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:53 AM

This is not a jury trial:  it is a trial before a judge. To think that a valid defense to the representative of the system is "The system couldn't defend me against the corruption of the theater head, therefore I arranged an illegal attack on him, even though I never went to the police with a stack of evidence against him" does not sound plausible to me.

I don't recall reading that he went to or said that he intended to  or did go to law enforcement with evidence about the corruption in the theater.    To whom, if anyone, did he present the "stack of evidence" that you describe, on Jan. 16, as someone above mentions?  Does any article indicate what it contained? Does law enforcement have those "stacks of evidence"? Have they been used at the trial?

 

I don't know the hierarchies, methods, or rules regarding labor negotiations, but I thought he represented dancers in negotiations.  Applying the question of "stacks of evidence" to the above hypotheticals, one can think of a range of ways to use stacks of evidence or involve thugs that do not involve going to law enforcement.  Maybe he planned to or did use the evidence in negotiations, or someone else did. 

 

For example, maybe he said, "Here is a problem, here is evidence of it, how can we address it?"   Or maybe he said, "Here is a problem to address, here is evidence of it, don't think you can threaten me not to use this evidence or raise this issue, because I have people on my side to protect me."    Or maybe he said, "Here is evidence of something bad, I will use it against you or beat you up unless you agree to fix it."  (This would assume he did not know of or intend the acid throwing, but rather, something more mild or escalating, as negotiations ensued.)  Those are all different ways he could have used the evidence that did not involve law enforcement. 

 

Or maybe the person he talked to about the stack of evidence used it without his knowledge.  Maybe the person who threw the acid wanted to get Filin out of the way, so someone more vulnerable or amenable would be frightened, bribed, or extorted, based upon the stack of evidence, to change things in exchange for payment or favors.    Maybe Filin was going to address the problems so someone wanted to get him out of the way, and the stacks of evidence would be buried, and things would stay the same.  

 

And then Pavel would be blamed for being a vindictive hot-head with an egotistical girlfriend who wanted a solo role, which would be a convenient, albeit not entirely logical or plausible, excuse.

 

Or maybe he kept the stacks of evidence as backup so something bad would not happen to him, or if something bad were to happen to him, then no one innocent would be blamed or framed for it.



#38 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,328 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 09:35 AM

Those scenarios would make interesting made-for-TV movies, but none of this has been posited in court where Dmitrichenko faces a long prison sentence if convicted, where the odds are stacked against him, and where if any of this was true, it might be in his interest to disclose them as to his state of mind; however as I wrote in the part you quoted, it rarely works to go to the authorities to argue that the authorities are useless and/or corrupt.  They usually don't take that too kindly.



#39 volcanohunter

volcanohunter

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 03:15 PM

I don't recall reading that he went to or said that he intended to  or did go to law enforcement with evidence about the corruption in the theater.    To whom, if anyone, did he present the "stack of evidence" that you describe, on Jan. 16, as someone above mentions?  Does any article indicate what it contained? Does law enforcement have those "stacks of evidence"? Have they been used at the trial?

 

I'm finding it a little difficult to retrieve articles going back to March, but among the reports about Dmitrichenko's interrogations, which were being leaked right, left and center, there was information that he had taken his concerns about Filin's alleged financial wrongdoing to Oleg Miskovets, a deputy general director of the Bolshoi Theater, on January 16, and the latter asked him to prepare a detailed report, but the investigation never went any further because of the attack, which took place the following day.

 

http://izvestia.ru/news/546345



#40 Paul Parish

Paul Parish

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,925 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 07:40 PM

Izvestsia reported this?

In addition, the victim Filin had intimate relations with Malandina, Natalia Alexandrovna, who was fired at the initiative of the victim as a result of a conflict that arose, as well as with Vinogradova, Maria Viktorovna, and Smirnova, Olga Vyacheslavovna.Conflicts also arose between Filin and [Anton] Getman in the course of their professional activities. Currently Prorvich, Maria Alexandrovna, lives with Filin."

 

Is there basis for these slurs? Have the ladies in question come forward? Commented at all on these things? I see that Catherine says Isvestia is on Tsiskaridze's side and  implies that these charges are false as well as scandalous -- but Catherine, do you KNOW they are false? If they are not false,  is there any evidence that they were consensual? American standards of power-playing, in paticular  of sexual harrassment, obsess us all of course, but they are far from universal -- and they are almost the opposite of what one would expect in a hierarchical society, but the potential for scandal -- and for using such material as  red herrings.

 

And it's also the case that of course dancers form relationship with other dancers -- nobody else knows what they go through, and  another dancer will be able to "get it" [as the City Ballet show has made clear] -- whether or not there's angling for advancement, there's a serious need for companionship.

 

What a great soap opera! "Who can you trust?"



#41 volcanohunter

volcanohunter

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 09:11 PM

The quote comes from a police report that was read aloud, at the request of Dmitrichenko, in court on the day Filin testified. Since we don't have access to transcripts of the police interviews, we don't know on what basis they reached these conclusions. The report speculates on three possible suspects or, perhaps, "persons of interest," so presumably it predates Dmitrichenko's arrest by some time. I expect that in the event of an attack, it would be usual to investigate any professional, financial or personal elements in the victim's life that might have factored into the crime. 

 

We don't have access to the exact text of the police report either, so we're relying on the reporters who were in court to record the text. Words to that effect were also reported in other sources, though with less precision. Nearly all reports picked up on Smirnova's name. The LA Times also mentioned Malandina, though it spelled her name incorrectly, and a Maria Alexandrovna, which presumably refers to Filin's wife.

http://www.latimes.c...y#axzz2kyEpq8Qv So it's safe to say that a text to that effect was read aloud in court, though we're relying on the shorthand skills of the reporters for the details.



#42 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,328 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 09:35 PM

Since the reference to Maria Alexandrovna was reported in the LA Times the day that Filin denied sleeping with any of the women except his wife, whom he also testified he never promoted, it's possible that he report was of Filin referring to to his own wife formally (with her patronymic).  All of the other names use the last name, not the patronymic.



#43 volcanohunter

volcanohunter

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 10:04 PM

The police report also refers to Filin's wife by surname, name and patronymic, so the LA Times reporter may have been rushing to record the text, but didn't catch her surname, which is fairly unusual. Recent research, on the other hand, has shown that Smirnov is the most common surname in Russia (somewhat to the surprise of researchers themselves, who expected it would be Ivanov), so no Russian reporter would have difficulty remembering it.

 

(In case anyone is wondering, the winning surnames are 1. Smirnov, 2. Ivanov, 3. Kuznetsov, 4. Popov, 5. Sokolov, 6. Lebedev, 7. Kozlov, 8. Novikov, 9. Morozov, 10. Petrov.)

http://genofond.ru/d....aspx?s=0&p=362



#44 puppytreats

puppytreats

    Gold Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 751 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 08:52 AM

Posted 16 November 2013 - 08:59 AM
 

This is not a jury trial:  it is a trial before a judge. To think that a valid defense to the representative of the system is "The system couldn't defend me against the corruption of the theater head, therefore I arranged an illegal attack on him, even though I never went to the police with a stack of evidence against him" does not sound plausible to me.

 
17 Nov 2013- 12:35 PM said:
Those scenarios would make interesting made-for-TV movies, but none of this has been posited in court where Dmitrichenko faces a long prison sentence if convicted, where the odds are stacked against him, and where if any of this was true, it might be in his interest to disclose them as to his state of mind; however as I wrote in the part you quoted, it rarely works to go to the authorities to argue that the authorities are useless and/or corrupt.  They usually don't take that too kindly.

I don't recall reading that Pavel said the prosecution or the court (i.e., the judge) were corrupt.  Did he?  I read on these boards about a "99% percent conviction rate", and the "odds [being] stacked against him,"  which gives rise to certain inevitable questions about fairness, but I don't remember Pavel commenting on issues related to presenting his case in court (or rather, of any such issues being discussed on these boards).  
 
I recall reading that Pavel said that (a) he was beaten into a partial confession and (b) he was attacked after entering prison by masked guards.   I also recall reading that another alleged attacker was stating that he was threatened by police.  Those are factors I would assume anyone would raise in his defense.  How could he not, even if might offend the prosecution or make it defensive?
 
As far as the issue of alleged corruption in the rebuilding of the Bolshoi, the admitted claquers, the influence of politics and oligarchs, the fighting for roles, the rich patrons and favors - that has been discussed on these boards, and in the press, but has Pavel raised it in the trial?  As Volcanohunter stated, Pavel was asked to write a report to the management by management about certain (unidentified?) issues, but that is not an accusation against the court.  I can see how those who might have thought they would be identified in a report, or in court, would not be happy, though, Helene.

#45 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,328 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 10:03 AM

How could he not?  So far, according to all reports coming from the court, he has not and his lawyer has not (to my knowledge), and it is now the prosecutor's turn to make the state's case.
 
No matter how the odds are stacked against him, arguing to the state that he had to hire a thug for an illegal attack on another person -- a beating being illegal, however technically or winked at -- instead of following through by official means (the report he was supposed to write and present) because legal recourse does not work usually doesn't result in a positive outcome, even when the judiciary is so supportive of the state.

Edited to add: this link from Ismene Brown's blog with summary and translation of day 7 of the trial featured the Chief of Police refuting Annadurdyev's assertion that the witness was intimated by police into claiming he had heard Dmitrichenko's end of a cell phone conversation [in which Dmitrichenko reported that Filin had just left the gala early].

http://www.ismeneb.c...to_testify.html

I don't think it's a stretch to assume that the judge would take the Chief of Police's word over Annadurdyev's, especially since Annadurdyev was not described as a good witness by any press reports we've seen.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):