8/14/2019 Sergey Magnitsky's Last Complaint on fabrication of evidences by investigator Silchenko (Translated)

1/2

To Investigator O.F. Silchenko

Investigator of Especially Important Cases

Investigative Committee of the Russian Interior Ministry

From S.L. Magnitskiy

Petition

On 9 November 2009, Investigator I.A. Varganov provided for my review Folder No. 2 ofcriminal case No. 311578 which was significantly different from Folder No. 2 and other folders

of the same criminal case that were shown to me by Investigator R.A. Gritsai on 20 October

2009.

In particular, all folders shown to me on 20 October 2009, including Folder No. 2, did not have

covers and none of the copies of documents contained in the folders were certified with a

corresponding mark and a signature of a certifying person directly on the copy. Instead, each

folder contained at the back, a page with a statement signed by you indicating the number of

collated and numbered documents in the folder and the authenticity of the copies of documents.

The ends of the string used to collate each folder were glued to that page with a white sheet of

paper that had a seal imprint No7 of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Interior Ministry.

Folder No. 2 shown to me on 9 November 2009 was placed in a binder made from thick carton

with dividers that were left empty and were not filled out. The collated folder shown to me on 20

October 2009 could not have been collated into the present binder without first undoing it. The

Folder No. 2 shown to me on 9 November 2009 was not collated with string, but with a thread

instead. The last page with statements signed by you about the authenticity of copies and the

number of pages was absent. Every page of Folder No. 2 shown to me on 9 November 2009

contained items that had been absent in Folder No. 2 shown to me on [20 October 2009],

including: a) seal No. 7 of the Investigative Committee of the Interior Ministry; b) a stamp of the

Russian Interior Ministrys Investigative Committee saying the copy is true; c) someones

name, visibly not your signature and no indication of the full name and title of the person who

signed it.

Therefore, the materials of criminal case 311578 which are now being shown for me to review,

are not the same materials that were produced to me on 20 October 2009 because they noticeably

differ in the manner of certifying the authenticity of included copies and in the manner of

binding, and because in both cases materials were collated in a manner that did not exclude the

possibility to undo the binding, and add, delete or replace documents, and I do not exclude the

possibility that these materials are also different in their contents.

Based on the above, because the materials of criminal case No. 311578 that I am currently

reviewing are different from the ones shown to me on 20 October 2009, I make a statement that

on 20 October 2009 I was not given the materials of the criminal case, but instead as it appears

now, some other materials. Therefore, I request the submiission to me, pursuant to p.1 of Article

217, the materials of criminal case No. 311578 and the full name and title of the person whocertified the copies in this case, because without this information copies are clearly not properly

certified. Additionally, it is now clear to me that originals of certain documents in the materials of

the criminal case shown to me as copies cannot be at the disposal of the investigation, therefore

the certified copies of these documents, in my opinion, could be treated as falsified proofs,

because they have been certified without comparing the copies admitted into the criminal case

with the original of the corresponding document or other properly verified copy of the document,

and I intend to insist on bringing to justice the persons who certified these copies or placed them

in the case materials.

11 November 2009 S.L. Magnitskiy

8/14/2019 Sergey Magnitsky's Last Complaint on fabrication of evidences by investigator Silchenko (Translated)

2/2