“No repentance, not even confession of guilt”. The decision of the Court is based on the unwillingness of the accused Khodorkovsky to confess his guilt and repent of his illegal acts. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its readers of what happened on August 21, 2008.
On this day 15 years ago, on August 21, 2008, the Ingodinsky District Court of the city Chita began to consider the question of a possible conditional early relief of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who 2005 by the verdict of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow was sentenced to 9 years (after the cassation to 8 years) of incarceration for fraud and tax evasion. For the execution of the sentence, he was sent to the town Krasnokamensk of the Chita District.
According to the Russian laws, an accused, who by his behavior has shown that he has mended his ways and can no longer be isolated from society, has the right to seize the court with a request for early parole. Khodorkovsky made use of that right. Together with his lawyers, following a procedure, he in advance had prepared such a request saying that “he has served half of the designated period, has worked conscientiously in the colony, has undertaken all that was possible for the payment of the incriminated tax arrears, has rigorously fulfilled all legal requirements and rules of internal regulations”.
The Khodorkovsky defense, so it seemed, decided to level the necessary “tax impulsions” of its client in front of the extremely radical followers of Khodorkovsky and, in particularly, noted that “for granting such a request there is no need for the accused to repent or even to admit his guilt”.
The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, on the next day held – to deny Khodorkovsky early parole. Thus the Court sustained the position of the Federal Penal Enforcement Service (FSIN) which insisted on the refusal of the early parole for Khodorkovsky. A representative of the FSIN drew the attention of the Court to four violations made by the accused in detention facilities. The question was of the reprimand for leaving his place of work without permission, for found instructions unforeseen by the internal regulations, for tea, which the prisoner drank with one of the accused in the room of the council of the unit, as well as for two lemons that had not been indicated in the register of the food products delivered to him. The prosecutor, from his side, substantiated the decision of the Court by Khodorkovsky's unwillingness to admit his guilt and to repent of his actions.
An effort of the unrepentant swindler to have early parole many observers considered hopeless from the outset – Khodorkovsky, as accused, was under arrest in connection with the "second" criminal case, within the framework of which the Office of the General Prosecutor of Russia incriminated the Yukos management of legalizing 450 billion rubles and 7.5 billion US dollars in the period from 1998 to 2004”, notes the website Prigovor.ru.
(See the previous publication: How children were made to zombies in the incubator of Yukos. “Children that have come through the Yukos camps should be unilinear, programmed for univocal actions, they bear badges with the inscription “Freedom to Khodorkovsky!”. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its reader of what happened on August 20, 2004).
On this day 13 years ago, on August 21, 2008, the Ingodinsky District Court of the city Chita began to consider the question of a possible conditional early relief of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who 2005 by the verdict of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow was sentenced to 9 years (after the cassation to 8 years) of incarceration for fraud and tax evasion. For the execution of the sentence, he was sent to the town Krasnokamensk of the Chita District.
According to the Russian laws, an accused, who by his behavior has shown that he has mended his ways and can no longer be isolated from society, has the right to seize the court with a request for early parole. Khodorkovsky made use of that right. Together with his lawyers, following a procedure, he in advance had prepared such a request saying that “he has served half of the designated period, has worked conscientiously in the colony, has undertaken all that was possible for the payment of the incriminated tax arrears, has rigorously fulfilled all legal requirements and rules of internal regulations”.
The Khodorkovsky defense, so it seemed, decided to level the necessary “tax impulsions” of its client in front of the extremely radical followers of Khodorkovsky and, in particularly, noted that “for granting such a request there is no need for the accused to repent or even to admit his guilt”.
The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, on the next day held – to deny Khodorkovsky early parole. Thus the Court sustained the position of the Federal Penal Enforcement Service (FSIN) which insisted on the refusal of the early parole for Khodorkovsky. A representative of the FSIN drew the attention of the Court to four violations made by the accused in detention facilities. The question was of the reprimand for leaving his place of work without permission, for found instructions unforeseen by the internal regulations, for tea, which the prisoner drank with one of the accused in the room of the council of the unit, as well as for two lemons that had not been indicated in the register of the food products delivered to him. The prosecutor, from his side, substantiated the decision of the Court by Khodorkovsky's unwillingness to admit his guilt and to repent of his actions.
An effort of the unrepentant swindler to have early parole many observers considered hopeless from the outset – Khodorkovsky, as accused, was under arrest in connection with the "second" criminal case, within the framework of which the Office of the General Prosecutor of Russia incriminated the Yukos management of legalizing 450 billion rubles and 7.5 billion US dollars in the period from 1998 to 2004”, notes the website Prigovor.ru.
(See the previous publication: How children were made to zombies in the incubator of Yukos. “Children that have come through the Yukos camps should be unilinear, programmed for univocal actions, they bear badges with the inscription “Freedom to Khodorkovsky!”. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its reader of what happened on August 20, 2004).
On this day 13 years ago, on August 21, 2008, the Ingodinsky District Court of the city Chita began to consider the question of a possible conditional early relief of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who 2005 by the verdict of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow was sentenced to 9 years (after the cassation to 8 years) of incarceration for fraud and tax evasion. For the execution of the sentence, he was sent to the town Krasnokamensk of the Chita District.
According to the Russian laws, an accused, who by his behavior has shown that he has mended his ways and can no longer be isolated from society, has the right to seize the court with a request for early parole. Khodorkovsky made use of that right. Together with his lawyers, following a procedure, he in advance had prepared such a request saying that “he has served half of the designated period, has worked conscientiously in the colony, has undertaken all that was possible for the payment of the incriminated tax arrears, has rigorously fulfilled all legal requirements and rules of internal regulations”.
The Khodorkovsky defense, so it seemed, decided to level the necessary “tax impulsions” of its client in front of the extremely radical followers of Khodorkovsky and, in particularly, noted that “for granting such a request there is no need for the accused to repent or even to admit his guilt”.
The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, on the next day held – to deny Khodorkovsky early parole. Thus the Court sustained the position of the Federal Penal Enforcement Service (FSIN) which insisted on the refusal of the early parole for Khodorkovsky. A representative of the FSIN drew the attention of the Court to four violations made by the accused in detention facilities. The question was of the reprimand for leaving his place of work without permission, for found instructions unforeseen by the internal regulations, for tea, which the prisoner drank with one of the accused in the room of the council of the unit, as well as for two lemons that had not been indicated in the register of the food products delivered to him. The prosecutor, from his side, substantiated the decision of the Court by Khodorkovsky's unwillingness to admit his guilt and to repent of his actions.
An effort of the unrepentant swindler to have early parole many observers considered hopeless from the outset – Khodorkovsky, as accused, was under arrest in connection with the "second" criminal case, within the framework of which the Office of the General Prosecutor of Russia incriminated the Yukos management of legalizing 450 billion rubles and 7.5 billion US dollars in the period from 1998 to 2004”, notes the website Prigovor.ru.
(See the previous publication: How children were made to zombies in the incubator of Yukos. “Children that have come through the Yukos camps should be unilinear, programmed for univocal actions, they bear badges with the inscription “Freedom to Khodorkovsky!”. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its reader of what happened on August 20, 2004).
On this day 13 years ago, on August 21, 2008, the Ingodinsky District Court of the city Chita began to consider the question of a possible conditional early relief of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who 2005 by the verdict of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow was sentenced to 9 years (after the cassation to 8 years) of incarceration for fraud and tax evasion. For the execution of the sentence, he was sent to the town Krasnokamensk of the Chita District.
According to the Russian laws, an accused, who by his behavior has shown that he has mended his ways and can no longer be isolated from society, has the right to seize the court with a request for early parole. Khodorkovsky made use of that right. Together with his lawyers, following a procedure, he in advance had prepared such a request saying that “he has served half of the designated period, has worked conscientiously in the colony, has undertaken all that was possible for the payment of the incriminated tax arrears, has rigorously fulfilled all legal requirements and rules of internal regulations”.
The Khodorkovsky defense, so it seemed, decided to level the necessary “tax impulsions” of its client in front of the extremely radical followers of Khodorkovsky and, in particularly, noted that “for granting such a request there is no need for the accused to repent or even to admit his guilt”.
The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, on the next day held – to deny Khodorkovsky early parole. Thus the Court sustained the position of the Federal Penal Enforcement Service (FSIN) which insisted on the refusal of the early parole for Khodorkovsky. A representative of the FSIN drew the attention of the Court to four violations made by the accused in detention facilities. The question was of the reprimand for leaving his place of work without permission, for found instructions unforeseen by the internal regulations, for tea, which the prisoner drank with one of the accused in the room of the council of the unit, as well as for two lemons that had not been indicated in the register of the food products delivered to him. The prosecutor, from his side, substantiated the decision of the Court by Khodorkovsky's unwillingness to admit his guilt and to repent of his actions.
An effort of the unrepentant swindler to have early parole many observers considered hopeless from the outset – Khodorkovsky, as accused, was under arrest in connection with the "second" criminal case, within the framework of which the Office of the General Prosecutor of Russia incriminated the Yukos management of legalizing 450 billion rubles and 7.5 billion US dollars in the period from 1998 to 2004”, notes the website Prigovor.ru.
(See the previous publication: How children were made to zombies in the incubator of Yukos. “Children that have come through the Yukos camps should be unilinear, programmed for univocal actions, they bear badges with the inscription “Freedom to Khodorkovsky!”. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its reader of what happened on August 20, 2004).
