Reverences towards the disrupter. How is the trial of the historian Sokolov going

Reverences towards the disrupter. How is the trial of the historian Sokolov going
Reverences towards the disrupter. How is the trial of the historian Sokolov going
23 November 2020, 10:52Society
A new twist during the court hearings in the case of the historian Oleg Sokolov, accused of the brutal murder of graduate student Anastasia Yeshchenko: the defense announced a second psychiatric examination.

Sokolov's lawyers insist: he killed a woman in the heat of passion. Sokolov also filed a lawsuit for the protection of honor and dignity.

Irina Mnishek

A petition to appoint a repeated psychological and psychiatric examination was made by the lawyers of the defendant Oleg Sokolov. In general, a repeated examination of this kind is an extremely rare thing in judicial practice. This means that the defendant's defense casts doubt on the conclusion of the experts of the Serbsky Institute in the capital, who recognized Sokolov as sane at the time of the murder. However, his defenders put forward a number of arguments in favor of the re-examination. One of them is the need to study the killer's state at each of three moments in time separately: the first non-fatal shot, the strangulation of the victim, and the next three shots, each of which could be fatal. According to Sokolov, he does not remember himself immediately after the first shot, with which he allegedly just wanted to scare the girl. In other words, Sokolov's defense is trying to prove that he could have fallen into a temporary insanity. In the opinion of the defense, the affect in Sokolov's actions cannot be ruled out. The Criminal Code provides for murder in a state of passion only up to 3 years in prison.

Let us recall: in November 2019, Oleg Sokolov was detained near the Moika River in St. Petersburg, when he tried to drown a backpack with women's hands. During a search in Sokolov's apartment, other parts of the body of the deceased were found. Sokolov confessed of the crime and was charged under Part 1 of Art. 105 (murder) and Part 1 of Art. 222 of the Criminal Code (illegal acquisition and storage of weapons). “I hope the court will refuse, since there are no grounds for the appointment of a re-examination. We will submit objections to this petition”, - said lawyer Alexandra Baksheyeva, who represents the relatives of the murdered woman.

We decided to get an expert opinion on whether it is possible to assume a state of passion in Oleg Sokolov at the time of the murder of graduate student Anastasia Yeshchenko. “Affect is a sudden emotional disturbance. During a long quarrel - as Sokolov describes it in his testimony - there could be no affect: at first, according to his version, they quarreled with his mistress, she left, then returned, after that he began to hit her. What kind of a sudden emotional excitement can we talk about here? His actions were deliberate and aimed at concealing the crime. I remember the interview we had with my flatmates. They heard the blows, but did not hear the shot. If we recreate the picture of the crime, then it is possible that first Sokolov mutilated his victim, then, seeing that she was dying, he decided to shoot her in order to later pass off all this as "passion". It is quite simple to prove this: wounds inflicted during life have hemorrhages. Those inflicted after death do not. And here we must refer to the results of the examination. In general, I must say that the position of Sokolov's lawyers in this process leaves much to be desired. An attempt to prove passion in this crime is complete, sorry, nonsense. If the judge is a professional, he will not admit such falsification, and even a repeated psychological and psychiatric examination in general. As for Sokolov's claims to protect his honor and dignity, in my opinion, there are no grounds at all for them. Sokolov, in my opinion, should receive a life sentence. I don’t understand why the verdict is not passed for so long”, - the lawyer, former investigator for particularly important cases under the General Prosecutor Vladimir Kalinichenko, told NI.

The first ravening of Sokolov - Yekaterina Przhigodzskaya.

The crime, which was committed by Oleg Sokolov, associate professor of history at St. Petersburg State University, might not have happened. But only on one condition: if scandals and strange incidents related to the personality of this person were noticed earlier and his inadequate actions were suppressed.

Not so long ago, GPM Entertainment Television LLC showed on the air a documentary film entitled “Invitation to the Ball. Victims of Russian Napoleon". The film appeared on the Premier video platform. In this film, another former beloved of the historian Sokolov talked about how in December 2008, in a rented apartment, a "history reenactor" mocked her and tortured her. Here is an excerpt from the statement of Ye. Przhigodzkaya, with whom she turned in 2008 to the 43rd police station of the Petrogradskiy district of St. Petersburg: “I ...was in Moscow on November 29, 2008, where I was beaten by my lover O. V. Sokolov on his rented apartment at 43 Kutuzovsky Prospekt... When we were in the apartment, he locked the door and began to help me take off my fur coat. Helping to take off my fur coat, O. V. Sokolov grabbed my arms from behind and began to tie it with a rope, which, as I understood, he had prepared in advance... O. V. Sokolov hit me in the face and stomach, after which he tied my hands to the chair and legs. I was completely helpless, unable to resist. OV Sokolov went into the next room while I remained tied to a chair in the hallway. He returned from the room with an iron and, in front of my eyes, plugged it into an outlet. When the iron got hot, he brought it to my face, so that I felt the heat coming from it, and began to threaten that it would disfigure me for life. Then he began to methodically beat me in the face, head, and hit me in the chest and stomach. To all my pleas to stop and change his mind, he only beat me even harder and threatened that he would kill, and bury the corpse at the nearest construction site, where they would hardly find me. For an hour or more, OV Sokolov beat me, hit me, lifted me by the hair and by the ears along with the chair".

12/01/2008 at the trauma center of the First Medical University. Pavlova, the victim had numerous traces of beatings, hemorrhages, concussion. However, the girl's statement did not get a move, the case was hushed up. “I was then a student, almost a child, no connections, no money... I simply did not have the strength and ability to move this business. You cannot understand what hell I went through”, - recalls Yekaterina Przhigodzkaya.

Court verdict of 1982 in relation to Rudolf Prizhogin and Oleg Sokolov.

And before that there was another alarming incident, which Sokolov's defense is silent about or calls it a "duck". However, this story took place. As it became known, back in 1982, Oleg Sokolov was found guilty of violating safety rules, which led to the death of a person. Then he was sentenced to a suspended sentence. Sokolov's defense categorically refutes this information, but the characterization given by the lawyer to the defendant sounded ambiguous: “ In fact, we are not convicted, he was not brought to criminal responsibility. All publications on this topic presented on the Web are “ducks” designed to slander and denigrate the historian, ”the defender said on November 13. However, this is how the former head of the Petrovsky military-historical teenage club Rudolf Pozhogin recalls the incident that occurred during the filming of the historical reconstruction: “At the trial, he ( Oleg Sokolov - editor's note ) said that I allegedly forced him to stand at the helm of the ship. But this is not the case. He just took advantage of the formality that had to be observed - to issue an order on the appointment of the ship's commander. So Sokolov said that he was "ordered". Then the following happened: “We walked more or less normally. There was no radio communication, - recalls the head of the Petrovsky military history club. - When "George", at the helm of which was Sokolov, began to lag behind us, I turned around and went to meet. About a hundred meters, I saw the frigate begin to sink. When flooded, the crew scattered over the waves. Sokolov pulled the boat to the stern, got into it alone, and headed towards us. He got on board with us and hid in the cabin. We went up to the guys and pulled them, except for one, out of the water".

That is, Sokolov, in fact, abandoned the ship he controlled and did not come to the aid of the drowning. As a result, a person died. This incident was quickly hushed up and tried not to remember it.

In general, in the behavior of Oleg Sokolov, up to the time of the murder he committed, there was a lot of strange things, but for some reason no one stubbornly paid attention to this either. Indicative, for example, is the scandal accusing Sokolov of plagiarism. Clouds began to gather around the professional reputation of Oleg Sokolov, associate professor at the Institute of History of St. Petersburg State University, when the famous historian and TV presenter Yevgeny Ponasenkov accused him of plagiarism in his monograph “The First Scientific History of the War of 1812” (890 pages in volume). Sokolov, in response, spoke in an unacceptable form about Ponasenkov's book. On March 2, the scandal went beyond the Internet. After Oleg Sokolov's open lecture “The battles of the Napoleonic era through the eyes of Louis-François Lejeune, an artist and a warrior”, Anton Kuzhim, a fourth-year student at St. Petersburg University of Railways, publicly asked the historian how he felt about the accusations of plagiarism. Sokolov's reaction turned out to be strange. He began to randomly shout insults at Ponasenkov, after that he turned to someone in the audience: "Gentlemen, explain to the young man!" Several people immediately rose and attacked Kuzhim. Sokolov at this time shouted: "Let's get out of here!" (strange vocabulary for a teacher, isn't it?).

After the lecture, Anton Kuzhim recorded the fact of beatings in the emergency room and wrote a statement to the police. To its credit, after what happened on the SPbU website, the official decision of the university ethics commission was published. It, in particular, said: " To admit that Associate Professor OV Sokolov, as a lecturer, violated the norms of ethics of relations with listeners and thereby damaged the image of the Institute of History and St. Petersburg State University as a whole".

Abdullah Khamidovich Daudov, dean of the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg State University, at the trial regretted that the university lost a good teacher in the person of Oleg Sokolov.

“The fact is that Sokolov is an aggressive, dangerous and vindictive person. He took his "adjutants" to lectures, who attacked those who disagreed. The question arises, why did he teach for so many years, why was he supported by the dean of the Faculty of History?", - asks the historian, member of the Independent Human Rights Council Yevgeny Ponasenkov.

Obviously, Oleg Sokolov had some support for a long time. First of all, on the part of Abdulla Daudov, Dean of the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg State University. “These people most likely were not friends, but they had many things in common. There is such a video - "Oleg Sokolov's Prank". After the dissenting student was once again beaten at a lecture by Oleg Sokolov, a pranker called him, who introduced himself as an employee of the Presidential Administration. Sokolov believed, got scared, became frank, and in this conversation betrayed Daudov, saying that he was not really a scientist. It is obvious that there is mutual responsibility there”, - the historian Yevgeny Ponasenkov believes. And he adds: “Many at the university, including myself, understand: Oleg Sokolov could have told all this in the media if he had been fired. In revenge".

Letters and appeals addressed to the dean of the Faculty of History about the unacceptable behavior of associate professor O. Sokolov have been received for a long time and in large numbers. Some of them are at the disposal of the editors. For example, Vasily Kunin , a former student of the Institute of History of St. Petersburg State University, now a deputy of the municipal council of the Malaya Okhta Moscow Region, wrote an appeal to Dean Daudov on March 4, 2018 . He reported on the reaction to his letter on his Facebook: “Unfortunately, the director did not honor me with a personal answer, redirecting my appeal to the legal department of St. Petersburg State University. As usual, they try to evade answers to acute questions".

By the way, during the court hearings, the dean of the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg State University A. Daudov strongly supported Oleg Sokolov, who brutally murdered a graduate student of the same faculty (the full record of this court session is available on the Court Portal Youtube channel). So, the lawyer of the victim A. Baksheeva asks Abdulla Daudov a question: "Tell me please, have you personally received any complaints from someone about Sokolov's actions or behavior ?" The Dean of the Faculty of History responded: " No, never, not a single complaint!" ... Also at the hearing, Dean Daudov complained: "It's a pity that we lost such a teacher!" (the killer of graduate student A. Eshchenko - associate professor Oleg Sokolov, editor's note ). Also, the dean of the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg State University allowed himself to distort the name of the graduate student killed by Sokolov. He also made aggressive attacks and threats against the historian Evgeny Ponasenkov, who is a witness in this case. After that, the Ethics Commission of St. Petersburg State University received an appeal from a witness in the case. “The words of Daudov actually contain a threat to me, and I take it in the most serious way, given that an employee who later committed a murder worked for a long time under the leadership of A. Daudov! .. There is a disregard for the life of the faculty, ignorance of the names and surnames of their own undergraduate and graduate students and even murder victims!”, - writes the historian, filmmaker, member of the Independent Human Rights Council Yevgeny Ponasenkov.

Another question arises: why did the leadership of the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg State University not condemn Sokolov's act after the incident with student Yekaterina Przhigodzka? Why did the dean of the history faculty not respond to numerous letters in connection with the beating of dissenting students at the lectures of Oleg Sokolov? Somehow, you must admit, all this is strange for a university where two Russian presidents studied - Dmitry Medvedev and Vladimir Putin. And the reputational losses of this university in connection with criminal cases, beatings, accusations of plagiarism of teachers, murder, finally, somehow do not fit in with the high-profile name of the University of Two Presidents.

In addition to the dean of the history department A. Daudov, Oleg Sokolov had other support. The fact is that for a long time he was an honorary member, one might say, the "soul" of the Russian military-historical society. As follows from the information on the RVIO Russian Military Historical Society) website, many influential politicians and officials with administrative resources were represented among its honorary members. So, in the ranks of RVIO Russian Military Historical Society) - President of the Cultural Foundation, director Nikita Mikhalkov, CEO of Roscosmos corporation Dmitry Rogozin, CEO of Rostec corporation Sergei Chemezov, presidential envoy to the Central Federal District Igor Shchegolev. And the chairman of the RVIO (Russian Military Historical Society) is no less than Vladimir Medinsky, a former minister of culture, now an assistant to the president. During his tenure as minister, Oleg Sokolov, associate professor of the history department of St. Petersburg State University, now accused of the brutal murder of a graduate student of the same department, just launched his stormy activity on historical reconstructions. He turned around as a person who feels his impunity. All this led to the fact that a person with a semi-criminal past and strange inclinations became an infallible character who got away with absolutely everything.

The protracted trial of the criminal and attempts by any means to change the article of the Criminal Code for him - all this suggests the idea: maybe someone is still providing patronage to the murderer?

Found a typo in the text? Select it and press ctrl + enter