{"id":350,"date":"2020-12-19T15:51:50","date_gmt":"2020-12-19T13:51:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/pravotvorets.local\/news\/ekspert-kndise-sprostuvav-vysnovky-svoiei-ekspertyzy-iaka-vvazhaietsia-holovnym-dokazom-u-spravi-sheremeta\/"},"modified":"2020-12-19T15:51:50","modified_gmt":"2020-12-19T13:51:50","slug":"ekspert-kndise-sprostuvav-vysnovky-svoiei-ekspertyzy-iaka-vvazhaietsia-holovnym-dokazom-u-spravi-sheremeta","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/news\/ekspert-kndise-sprostuvav-vysnovky-svoiei-ekspertyzy-iaka-vvazhaietsia-holovnym-dokazom-u-spravi-sheremeta\/","title":{"rendered":"The KNDISE expert denied the conclusions of his examination, which is considered the main evidence in the Sheremet case"},"content":{"rendered":"

Previously, our human rights initiative justified why the comprehensive psychological and portrait examination of the KNIISE scientist Yuri Irkhin cannot be considered evidence of guilt in the Sheremet case. It was the investigation that lightly dubbed it \u201ckey evidence.\u201d Now we will describe in detail how Yuri Irkhin himself refuted the conclusions of his own examination in a comment to journalists, and the prosecutor confirmed its dubious evidentiary weight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"👉\"The examination was not conducted using a scientifically sound methodology, but rather the personal opinion of experts. Irkhin admitted that the methodology does not exist in the registry, and he allegedly used an \u201cinnovative method\u201d. The expert promised that his methodology would be published in a year or a half. For this, he even managed to be brought to disciplinary responsibility by the qualification commission of the Ministry of Justice. It is worth adding that even the OGPU prosecutor Serhiy Zuzak, who was previously part of the group of prosecutors in this case, stated that the evidentiary value of the examination in this case is questionable. Four state expert institutions refused to repeat the KNDISE study, since the methodology is not registered, and it is impossible to \u201crecognize\u201d people from the video as part of a psychological study. However, already now, based on Irkhin\u2019s author\u2019s assumptions, Antonenko, Kuzmenko, and Dugar have been found guilty of the journalist\u2019s murder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"👉\"Irkhin called it a \u201cmystery\u201d why the investigation identified his expertise as the main evidence in the case. He added: he has been working in this field for thirty years, but this is the first time his expertise has become key evidence. Interestingly, prosecutor Zuzak later told reporters in a comment that at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation, the prosecution did not know that the methodology was not registered, but was the personal opinion of the experts. \u201cOf course, this undermines the evidentiary weight of the expertise. At the stage of the pre-trial investigation, we identified this expertise as the main evidence, since it directly indicated the involvement of the suspects in the murder. But in my opinion, this expertise alone as the main evidence is not enough to send the case to court,\u201d the prosecutor said. However, the new group of prosecutors in the Sheremet case for some reason called this expertise \u201cthe main evidence\u201d of the suspects\u2019 guilt and went to court with it. Doesn\u2019t this indicate that the case is politically motivated?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"👉\"The expert opinion is based on the literature of the former Ukrainian law enforcement officer and scientist, and now an \u201cexpert\u201d of the pseudo-republic \u201cDPR\u201d Vladislav Sednev. He is a former colleague of Irkhin, who at the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian war remained in occupied Donetsk to work in a terrorist organization \u2013 the so-called \u201cProsecutor General\u2019s Office of the DPR\u201d. He published his monograph \u201cEssays on the Theory of Forensic Examination\u201d in 2015, already being in the territory not controlled by Ukraine. And Irkhin referred to it in the list of used literature. By the way, scientist Sednev thundered into the \u201cPeacemaker\u201d base because he betrayed his oath. In turn, Irkhin stated that he does not consider his colleague an \u201cenemy of the people and a traitor.\u201d \u201cTo my great regret, we have not maintained relations with him since 2014. Sednev is an outstanding psychologist, scientist, doctor of legal and medical sciences. He remained in Donetsk, our ideological platforms diverged. I do not know about this. His scientific work is freely available. I did not know that it was published when he was already in the \u201cDPR\u201d. These are echoes of 1937. You are probably hinting that I should disown my father, etc.? Nothing prevents me, I do not perceive him as an enemy of the people, as a traitor. He is a scientist who has the results of his scientific work. I used them,\u201d Irkhin justified himself. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"👉\"Irkhin had a clear motivation to falsify expert data in the Sheremet case. According to lawyer Vitaliy Kolomiyets, the reason is the expert\u2019s attachment to terrorists. The lawyer explained: if they recognize the scientific knowledge and authority of a person who, according to Ukrainian law, is an accomplice or accomplice in the activities of terrorist organizations, then this is, at least, a separate element of a disciplinary offense. Because what is a crime for the state cannot be a benefit for an individual employee. \u201cAnd if they try to legalize these illegal armed formations in any way, then Irkhin will be an accomplice of these criminals,\u201d the lawyer summarizes. Finally, the defense of the accused considers KNIISE specialist Yuriy Irkhin to be an accomplice in the crime of falsifying evidence in the Sheremet case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More on the topic:https:\/\/lb.ua\/…\/465249_ekspert_spravi_sheremeta…<\/a>https:\/\/news.24tv.ua\/advokat-yani-dugar-pro…<\/a>https:\/\/youtu.be\/45iuhRixlZg<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Earlier, our human rights initiative substantiated why the complex psychological and portrait examination of KNDISE scientist Yuriy Irkhin cannot be considered...<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":351,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"ub_ctt_via":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-350","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bez-katehorii"],"aioseo_notices":[],"featured_image_src":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/129309697_110585650890397_5492022412459080805_n.jpg","author_info":{"display_name":"admin","author_link":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/news\/author\/admin\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/350","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=350"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/350\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/351"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=350"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=350"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravotvorets.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=350"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}