Ivan Zubov
As Novye Izvestia has already reported, the Moscow Regional Court sentenced Elina Sushkevich to nine years in prison and Elena Belaya to 9.5 years in prison in the case of the murder of a premature baby. The investigation stated that in November 2018, a premature baby (weighing 700 grams) appeared in the maternity hospital of a citizen of Uzbekistan, and acting. the head physician Elena Belaya allegedly decided to kill him so as not to spoil the statistics, and the resuscitator Elina Sushkevich, on her orders, introduced magnesia to the child.
The doctors did not admit their guilt, the Russian Society of Neonatologists stood up for them, they were also supported by the head of the National Medical Chamber Leonid Roshal, who stated that the survival rate of infants at such terms is 5-10%.
In 2020, the jury in court acquitted Sushkevich and Belaya, they came to the conclusion that the fact that magnesium sulfate was administered to the child, which allegedly caused death, was not proven. However, in May 2021, the decision was canceled and the case was transferred from Kaliningrad to Moscow. The prosecutor's office demanded 13 years in prison for women.
In her final statement, Belaya said she considered the jury's verdict unfair, as "they were under pressure."
Sushkevich, in her last speech, stated that the court “has every opportunity to pass an acquittal, dismiss the jury and send the case for review”: “I never said that the child had no chance. Was. But I was called too late. Whatever decision the court made, I did not kill Akhmedova's child. I didn't add magnesium. I am not ashamed to look into the eyes of friends, colleagues, parents, and so on. I am not ashamed to look into the eyes of the parents of my patients. I ask the court to issue a verdict of not guilty, ”the RTVI channel quotes the defendant.
However, on Tuesday, September 6, the court found them guilty. In addition to the huge terms of imprisonment, the court also banned both from practicing medicine for three years. Belaya's actions were qualified by the court as organizing the murder of a minor, Sushkevich's actions - as the execution of the murder. The convicted doctors pleaded not guilty. Their lawyer said the doctors would appeal the verdict.
Defense lawyers believe that the presiding judge violated all the fundamental principles of the judiciary. “This is the objectivity of the court, its impartiality, the presumption of innocence of the defendant, competitiveness and equality of the parties. And the court is the last instance for a person, where he can protect his rights and find justice. There are no other instances,” says lawyer Viktor Borodin .
The tools that the court used when delivering its verdict are also highly questionable. The Chairman of the Association of Clinical Toxicologists of Russia, Galina Nikolaevna Sukhodolova , writes in her conclusions about the forensic medical examination conducted: “its results do not stand up to criticism, it was actually carried out twice by the same persons. The analyzes revealed an increased content of magnesium, iron and zinc. What does it mean that Sushkevich killed the child not only by introducing magnesium, but also zinc? And no one began to refute it. Although it is known that magnesium must be present in the body without fail. It is also known that the mother of the child during pregnancy daily took the drug "Elevit", which contains zinc, iron, and magnesium. The difference in the concentration of these substances proves that they entered the body through the placenta, and not through the umbilical vein. All this, according to us, toxicologists, confirms the supply of microelements to the baby not through the umbilical vein, but through the placenta. However, neither the placenta nor the blood of the newborn was subjected to research for the presence of these substances, neither during his short life, nor posthumously. There was no confirmation of the fact of a rapid jet injection of any drug before the death of the child.
By the way, one of the famous Russian micropediatricians, Professor Marina Degtyareva , found in the world literature the figures of normal indicators, including magnesium, in newborns, which, for some reason, were not found by the authors of the forensic medical examination. But the court was not even interested in this and did not examine the data.
President of the National Medical Chamber Leonid Roshal does not rule out that the results of the examination were falsified: “The entire examination is a specific order. Magnesium is not included in the official list of drugs for mandatory determination in a forensic medical examination. It is not clear why they did not look at mercury, thallium, lithium and other elements with the help of which poisoning is also possible? The studies were tailored to the task, but they overdid it, because in addition to magnesium, they also found an increase in iron and zinc. It can't be that rude! The investigator seized tissue samples for sending to Moscow on March 19, and she signed the decision to conduct an examination on March 20, the material was given to a laboratory in Moscow only on March 22. Who could have access to these materials and when? Where in the law is it written that the material for research is transferred before the decision itself without a special procedure? (…)
We will go to the end and will not sit idly by. Convicted doctors are not guilty. The professional community demands a retrial of the case with a second forensic medical examination and a new jury.”
At the same time, the judge, according to those present at the meeting, in addition to the role of the accuser, also took on the role of a medical expert, stating that “there can be no doubts about the conclusions of the forensic medical examination, that he had never seen such a voluminous examination.”
In addition, the defenders of the doctors are confident that the guilty verdict was passed by the jury under pressure from the judge. They believe that he committed many procedural violations, including when pronouncing parting words. “The judge, in his parting word before the removal of the jury to the deliberation room for a verdict, accused the defendants for more than two hours. In terms of time and content, this parting word in many respects surpassed even the speech of the official representative of the prosecutor's office and pointed only to the facts pointing to the guilt of the defendants, Roshal said. - Does he have a special education, a specialist in neonatal diseases, a resuscitator? For me personally, as a specialist who has been dealing with neonatal diseases for more than 20 years, participated in the creation of two neonatal surgery centers, the author of sections of a monograph on neonatal diseases - not everything is clear in the conclusion of forensic medical experts in this case, like many other specialists in this field " .
According to the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “On the application by the courts of the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation governing legal proceedings with the participation of jurors”, the court is prohibited from expressing its opinion, its attitude to evidence and drawing conclusions. The parting word should only briefly remind the jury of what evidence from both sides was examined and what the witnesses spoke about. This is a violation of Article 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. However, the judge of the Moscow Regional Court interpreted this order in a very peculiar way.
“At the court session, the presiding judge proved to the jury the guilt of the defendants, selectively referring to the evidence, explaining to the jury that the defendants gave contradictory testimonies, that the law allows their lawyers to lie and nothing will happen to them, and the public prosecutor is an independent person. All objections of the defense were rejected,” said lawyer Kamil Babasov . The lawyer believes that the presiding judge had information about the mood of the jury and he understood how many votes he needed for a guilty verdict, and therefore took on the role of prosecutor.
This verdict, like the similar one handed down to the journalist Ivan Safronov, shocked the public. Journalist Kirill Shulika writes:
“This, of course, is not the terms of Ivan Safronov, but the verdict is still shocking, let's say so. At the same time, even official doctors like Roshal and Protsenko here were on the side of their colleagues, and many said that after such sentences, investigators and prosecutors would treat people, because doctors would be afraid of sentences for medical errors or even what they interpret as the mistake of Bastrykin's department ... "
Doctor and popular blogger Andrey Volna draws attention to the truly dashing behavior of judges near Moscow, which clearly indicates their bias in this case:
“Now they came for the doctors.
Elina Sushkevich - 9 years in prison.
Elena Belaya - 9.5 years in prison.
Plus 3 "on the horns" of each.
There are no more crimes there than in the case of Ivan Safronov. Emotionally philistine - yes. More. But for professionals, everything is clear.
Let me remind you that initially the jury acquitted my colleagues.
The case was sent for retrial from Kaliningrad to Moscow. And at the first meeting. The Moscow regional "court" of women was sent to a pre-trial detention center because of ... the lack of local registration.
And then they planted it.
Curtain…"