Souvenir mace and "agent-provocateurs": Dnipro court acquits former prosecutor in bribery case for the second time

Souvenir mace and "agent-provocateurs": Dnipro court acquits former prosecutor in bribery case for the second time

The Central District Court of Dnipro found a former prosecutor not guilty of extortion and receiving undue benefits.

This was reported by «Court Reporter» with reference to the verdict dated January 16.

In 2015, in the town of Petrykivka, Dnipropetrovsk region, the police were investigating illegal tree felling. One man admitted his guilt, facing a fine of 1,700 UAH. However, the prosecutor of Petrykivka district in Dnipropetrovsk region allegedly summoned a police operative to his office and ordered him to demand 2,500 USD from the man to avoid criminal liability. Later, under the supervision of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the operative documented the prosecutor’s actions and, according to the case materials, handed over money to him twice—500 USD and 50,000 UAH. Covert surveillance recordings captured the operative stating that the police leadership forced him to «resolve the issue with the prosecutor and transfer the money.»

The former prosecutor did not plead guilty and claimed he had no connection to the tree felling case. The operative, from whom he allegedly took the money, was supposedly indebted to him. The policeman’s wife needed funds to renovate the banquet hall of her restaurant. According to the prosecutor, in 2015, he agreed to finance the renovation of this restaurant. He provided the money without a receipt, as he had a trusting relationship with the police officer.

Regarding the materials of covert investigative (search) actions, the accused stated that they did not reflect the actual course of events. According to him, the video recordings were edited, contained fragments, and the phrases cited in the protocols were taken out of context. He also argued that the authenticity of screenshots of correspondence in the Viber messenger could not be verified since the phones used for the communication were not examined in court.

The former prosecutor also noted that during his detention, he was beaten, and SSU officers appropriated his personal belongings, including fuel coupons and a souvenir mace, which they referred to as «trophies.»

The operative insisted during the court hearing that he had no personal relationship with the accused outside of work and had not borrowed money from him. However, he confirmed that the accused occasionally inquired about the progress of the renovation at his family’s restaurant, so he sent him photos of the banquet halls as advertisements.

The man in whose interests the money was allegedly transferred stated in court that he was forced by SSU officers to write a statement about the prosecutor extorting a bribe.

A witness recounted that he was not involved in tree felling but worked as an intermediary in transportation. On one occasion, people and vehicles transporting timber were detained. He called a familiar police operative, who assured him that everything would be fine. However, later, unknown individuals contacted him and instructed him to write a statement claiming that the prosecutor was demanding money from him. They threatened to hold him accountable for millions in damages due to illegal logging if he refused. The witness stated that he did not know the prosecutor before these events, and the prosecutor never demanded money from him. He explained that he succumbed to pressure due to confusion and fear, as he was younger, had no one to consult with, and was intimidated by the SSU officers.

In 2020, the former prosecutor was acquitted. The court noted that the crime report lacked information about who demanded what, from whom, where, and under what circumstances. In other words, the investigation was initiated in a manner that allowed for provocation and manipulation of the complainant and the identification of the future suspect.

It was revealed that the police operative had repeatedly participated in SSU operations as a person providing undue benefits to officials, which showed signs of provoking bribery.

In 2023, the appellate court overturned the acquittal, and the case was reconsidered.

During the second consideration, the accused was acquitted again.

The defense’s version that the money transfer was related to debt repayment was not disproven, in the court’s opinion. The recordings of conversations between the parties involved could not unequivocally prove extortion or receipt of undue benefits.