The Investigatory Committee Recognized Facts of Falsification of Elections on Videos on the Internet

Propaganda war is being carried out against people of Russia, thus even state structures act on the part of enemies of people. This war is carried out via words, while state structures, nevertheless, are still responsible under the law for lie in their communiques. Article 292 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation “Official Forgery”: “…introduction of known false information into official documents by a functionary, and also by a civil servant or a local self-government employee”. Certainly, inspectors of the Investigative Committee will get out having such judges, but nevertheless!

Therefore, reading communiques, is necessary to remember that state employees lie seldom directly, they, as a rule, lie indirectly – they tell what you don't ask them, but keep mum about things they are obliged to tell. Let's go through it on the example.

Right after elections hundreds videos from polling districts which proved that crime provided by article 142.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was committed appeared in the Internet: “Falsification of Election… Documents”.

Churov at once gave interview to the magazine "Itogi" (№ 49 06.12.11): “Before the day of voting I knew about several false “election committees” in flats where they shot “cinema”. I think we will see it”.

As Churov declared that videos were shot in false apartments, the Investigative Committee of Russia began checking up of those videos. What do you think inspectors were obliged to do? Certainly to go to those polling districts which were shown on video, to find witnesses and to confirm or deny the facts fixed by video shooting. Why? Because these are facts of crime provided by article 142.1 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation.

What did inspectors do? It follows from official statement of the Investigative Committee of Russia http://www.sledcom.ru/news/ 84396.html:

“Within the limits of remedial checks of infringements connected with carrying out of election campaign at elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation of the sixth convocation the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation investigated and studied video data placed in the Internet where infringements on polling districts are ostensibly fixed. Within the limits of these checks inspectors received expert judgments of experts-criminalists of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia that the majority of videos have cut-and paste elements.

In particular such videos were shot in the Moscow, Kemerovo, Sverdlovsk, Tyumen and Tula areas, Krasnoyarsk region, the Chuvash Republic and the Republic North Ossetia-Alania, as well as in St.-Petersburg, Ekaterinburg and Moscow”.

If it’s possible to place video in the Internet without cut-and-paste? After all recording of events over time bears mass of empty information senselessly making files heavier. It turns out that "experts" and inspectors of the Investigative Committee used two months for established of what was clear without it? The Investigative Committee isn't ashamed to report about it as about some useful work??

Now attention.

“Facts of presence of posed plots (performances) are elicited in the course of checks. So, for example, one of videos depicts polling district № 2943 located in Moscow in Khoroshevo-Mnevniki in the college № 7560, it ostensibly fixes rough infringements of elective legislation. However, it is established that the premise on the video doesn't correspond to the one of the specified polling district, people present on it aren't members of election committee, they are false”.

So, from several hundreds videos they, ostensibly, revealed one really shot in false election committee. (Very false as polling district № 2943 of Moscow was situated in college № 1560, not in №7560 as it’s stated in the official statement of the Investigative Committee of Russia). What would you do if you were inspector? Correctly – you would question Churov: whence he before the termination of investigatory check and “before the day of voting” knew that that video was already shot? After all, forgive me, there are not many versions in this case, I think there’s only one version even – this video was shot by request of Churov who understood that at present availability of videorecording it would be difficult to avoid considerable quantity of video proofs of falsification of the voting results. Really – otherwise whence Churov could know about presence of one such videoclip among hundreds original videorecordings? May be some enemy of Russia shot it and then called Churov? No, it’s not so! More likely, FSB reported Churov that, say, your task is executed! I’ll repeat, if it’s possible otherwise?

However, it’s not so: there’s only one video on the Internet about elections on site № 2943. It is placed not on YouTube, but on the site of a project “NeSekretno” http://nesekretno.ru/po wer/3459/V_UIK_2943_Industrial_nogo_raiona_uge_podpisal and the given polling district № 2943 is not in Moscow, but in the Industrial area of Perm, accordingly, it is a question of municipal elections and elections in regional Legislative Assembly: “The following candidates run for on Industrial one-mandatory district №6: Ilyas Dolgov from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Julia Nikolaeva from LDPR, self-promoted worker Edward Oshchepkov and the member of “United Russia” Gennady Shilov". It seems that the Investigative Committee of Russia gave job to all thimbleriggers disappeared from railway stations, didn’t it?

So, the Investigative Committee looked through the Internet, received and studied one of the types of proofs of mass falsification of results of elections in all cities and towns of Russia. Two months passed, the Investigative Committee is obliged to pass remedial decision – to initiate criminal case or deny prosecution.

But the Investigative Committee of Russia can’t initiate criminal case against criminals of the CEC before presidential elections – the CEC will go to prison and there will be nobody to count the votes. It can’t as well deny prosecution – the facts are at hands, if Putin suddenly doesn't become the president and it would be necessary to answer for deny in initiation of criminal case against obvious criminals? That’s why the Investigative Committee invented occasion to drag the check out and not to make any decision:

“But the most remarkable is that all fabricated videos were spread from one server which is located in the territory of the USA in California. In this connection the Investigative Committee takes measures to establish the authors and customers of those videos”.

I think you understand that if somebody’s wife will write application in the IC with the requirement to find out who the drinking partner of her husband is, the IC has no right to waste state money for such check as drunkenness of the husband isn't a crime. Now question - what article of the Criminal Code forbids shooting and cut-and-paste of videos? Why did the IC get engaged in finding-out of the "authors" (who don't hide as they were observers on elections) and "customers" (who were represented not hiding itself mass-media, say, “Novaya Gazeta” and parties, say, "Yabloko")?

It is clear that server in California doesn't give chance to destroy vestiges of the crime to the IC, but whether it’s criminal to hide proofs there where they are inaccessible to criminals-inspectors? (Server YouTube is located in California and, it goes without saying, all videos on YouTube “were spread from one server”).

As we see, the IC itself commits crime, sabotaging investigation of the crime of the CEC and thus lying to people. How else we can explain inhaling in initiation of the criminal case for falsification of voting results across all Russia?

I will remind that Initiative group on referendum carrying out “For Responsible Power” distributes, gathers and transfers in the State Office of Public Prosecutor statements of the following maintenance:

“As the press and the Internet informed the State Duma on the facts of mass falsification of voting on December, 4th, 2011, that is they informed on the act falling within signs of crime provided by article 142.1 “Falsification of Election… Documents” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, I ask You to inspect voting results on ALL polling districts across ALL Russia, to initiate criminal cases and to bring to justice (together with organizers of the crime) all bastards dared to deform the national will”.

We are reproached that the State Office of Public Prosecutor is not obliged to check such statements as “it is not specified particularly where the crime is committed and there are evidences of crime and inspectors are not obliged to surf Internet”.

So, the scene of the crime is specified correctly – the CEC system, it’s also clear what should be checked – all local election committees in Russia. It’s as well clear how to check – to verify original reports with data of the CEC. As to the fact that inspectors are not obliged to surf Internet, it’s already been denied by message of the Investigatory Committee resulted by me. It appears that the Investigatory Committee has already checked up the Internet, carried out examination and ascertained that such type of proofs as video clips really proves fact of falsification across all Russia.

For certain people in IC are familiar with site “Grazhdanin Nabludatel” http://nabludatel.org/vybory-v-gd-analitika/, with http://ruelect.com/ru/ and with analytics of mathematicians, for example, http://onsb.org/elections-mosco w-2011-12-07.html.

What should we do? We have only one thing to do – to use meetings and all kinds of pressure to force The Investigative Committee to execute the law and to check up real results of voting across all polling districts of Russia. Received results will solve all questions of resolutions holding meetings – both with Churov, re-election of Duma and with presidential elections.

Send by mail

Print