So what did you think — that I was lying when I said from the very beginning that the *Kirovles-2* verdict had been copied from the *Kirovles-1* verdict down to the very last letter?
Yes, it’s hard to believe: it’s outright prohibited, there is even a specific resolution by the Plenum of the Supreme Court on this matter, and it was a stupid thing to do — but they did it anyway.
Here, Dissernet checked it:
Even the order in which the evidence was examined was taken from the first verdict, even though, obviously, it was different — the witnesses appeared in a different sequence, and the documents were reviewed differently.
They just copied it over, that’s all.
And you know, a thought is starting to occur to me now:
Could Judge Vtyurin be a secret supporter of mine?
Maybe I won him over with my final statement? Maybe he was himself stunned when he read the indictment and decided that, yes, he would have to carry out the Kremlin’s instructions on the verdict, but he should at least find some way to help us?
In any case, he made our job as easy as possible - both in getting the verdict overturned; - and in finding arguments to show that the case is political and fabricated.
So, Alexei Leonidovich, thank you — if that’s the case!
P.S. By the way, we appealed the verdict today. After their decision, we can go back to the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights).
People