{"id":9329,"date":"2014-05-10T12:32:18","date_gmt":"2014-05-10T08:32:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/adcmemorial.org\/?p=9329"},"modified":"2015-02-03T15:10:53","modified_gmt":"2015-02-03T12:10:53","slug":"anschluss-of-crimea-disgrace-for-russia-poster-acquitted","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/adcmemorial.org\/en\/news\/anschluss-of-crimea-disgrace-for-russia-poster-acquitted\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cAnschluss of Crimea \u2013 disgrace for Russia\u201d: poster acquitted"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\u0421\u0422\u0415\u0428\u0410<\/a>An administrative legal case against Stefania Kulayeva regarding alleged breach of the Code of administrative violations on the rules of public assemblies and \u201cfailure to observe legal demands of police officers\u201d on March 2, 2014, during street protests against annexation of Crimea by Russia, has been finally completed after two months of consideration. The court stated that it failed \u201cto discover corpus delicti\u201d on both articles of the code which were under consideration and ruled to stop legal procedures on both cases (Article 20.2 section 5 and Article 19.3 section 1 of the Code of administrative violations).<\/p>\n

During the court hearings the prosecutor\u2019s claims on participation in illegal manifestation, i.e. that Kulayeva \u201cwas among the mass of citizens in order to publicly express her opinion by shouting phrases against authorities and state structure, which expressed her position with the aim of influencing public opinion\u201d – were not proven. The court found it impossible to accept these claims made in police officers\u2019 reports (astonishing in both their form and content) and to \u201cconsider these testimonies as truthful in the absence of other proofs and found them insufficient to prove S.B.Kulayeva guilty of legal violation of Article 20.2 section 5 of the Code of administrative violations\u201d.<\/p>\n

Contrary to that, the court accepted explanations provided by Kulayeva and her witness for the defense N.L.Berman to be trustworthy. According to these testimonies, Kulayeva didn\u2019t shout anything and stood away from the rest of the protesters with a poster that read \u201cAnschluss of Crimea \u2013 disgrace for Russia\u201d. She came to St.Isaak square in order to \u201cpublicly express her opinion\u201d because she \u201cdisagreed with Russian troops entering the territory of Crimea, which led to military conflict between Russia and the Ukraine\u201d.<\/p>\n

The fact that the court confirmed the defendant\u2019s right to publicly express her opinion is extremely important, same as an unbiased approach to the testimonies presented by the parties in court during the course of the court hearings.<\/p>\n

The court has also failed to discover \u201cillegal negligence\u201d that Kulayeva was charged with based on her refusal to go to the police bus by herself as she was detained, because as the video footage of the event that was considered by the court showed, \u201csuch demands (to go to the police bus) were not made by police officers to people , including S.B.Kulayeva, \u2026 and the latter was lifted from the bench by her arms and taken to the police bus\u201d. Based on that, the court didn\u2019t discover corpus delicti for Article 19.3 section 1 and ruled to stop legal procedures on this.<\/p>\n

Court ruling regarding Article 19.1 (in Russian