“The property of the company “Tomskneft” was channel out at the depreciated book value”. “Mislead shareholders about the essence of deals”. Knowingly lying S.P. Bakhmina. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its readers of what happened on April 19, 2006.
On this day, on April 19, 2006, the Simonovsky District Court of Moscow sentenced Svetlana Bakhmina, the deputy head of the legal department of the company “Yukos-Moskva”, to seven years of imprisonment in a general regime colony. The defendant was found guilty of committing economic crimes. She was accused of “committing embezzlement by way of misappropriation in 1998-1999 of the property of the JSC “Tomskneft”, as part of an organized group, on a large scale, to the total amount exceeding 8 billion rubles (Article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as well as of tax evasion on an especially large scale (Article 198 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
(See also the article “On this day, Svetlana Bakhmina was served with "Vasyugan” and “Vakh”).
THE PROPERTY OF “TOMSKNEFT” WAS “DRAINED” AT THE DEPRECIATION BOOK VALUE
As established by the court, in 1998-1999, unidentified by the investigation employees of the Oil Company “Yukos” and Svetlana Bakhmina were formed into a criminal group to steal the property of the company “Tomskneft”. They realized their plan by transferring the main assets of the company to the total amount of 8.6 billion rubles to affiliates in order to indemnify the property of the company in case of bankruptcy. With the help of a forged expert conclusion, the property was valued not according to the book value, but to the appreciated value, and this allowed to downplay almost three times the price of the assets.
The whole amount of the siphoned property at the appreciated value reached, in the end, 3 billion 380 million 180 thousand rubles, although its real price exceeded 8 billion rubles. The court pointed out that it was Bakhmina who had given the opinion of the legality of this deals and had organized the signing of the delivery and acceptance certificate of the main assets to the books of the “affiliates”. Concurrently, the court took into consideration the existence of her two miners, as well as her personal characteristics.
(See also the article “What Svetlana Bakhmina has been sitting for”. How “the mother of two children” cheated Khodorkovsky as part of the “Criminal Group (OPG) Trushin-Gololobov-Kurtsin).
KNOWINGLY LYING “DESK JOCKEY”
“The defense”, wrote the newspaper “Vremya Novostey”, “insisted that there had been no elements of crime in Svetlana Bakhmina’s actions. According to her lawyers, she was a “desk jockey” and could not operate the property or sign orders to estrange it, and she only did what her bosses Aleksanyan and Gololobov ordered her. The same said numerous witnesses, in particular, Leonid Filimonov, who had been the president of the board of directors of “Tomskneft” at that time”.
Actually, during the pre-trial investigation, he did name Ms. Bakhmina among those at whose initiative the funds had been channeled to Yukos affiliates, but in court he categorically denied all that and said that the company lawyer was not guilty of anything”.
From the materials of the criminal case No 18/432766-07 against Khodorkovsky M.B. one can see why the witness Filimonov “categorically denied” what had been said earlier and why the court could have a critical attitude towards his testimonies.
“On 15.01.1999, in Moscow, at the address: 1st Schipkovsky Lane, H. 20, at the meeting of the shareholders of the JSC “Tomskneft” VNK, to the board of directors were elected employees of the JSC Oil Company Yukos who were under control of the criminal group, namely:
Filimonov L.I., first vice-president, head of the department of oil production of the CJSC “Yukos-EP”, Morin A.K., head of the administrative office of the JSC “Yukos P.M.”, and Bakhmina S.P., head of the working with entities section of the legal department of the JSC “Yukos-Moskva”. Thus, out of nine members of the board, all persons were under control of Khodorkovsky and other members of the organized group at their working places”.
Later, in August 2006, during the consideration of the lawyers’ complaint, the Moscow City Court excluded from the verdict against Bakhmina Article 198 (Tax Evasion), and dropped the case with this regard in connection with the expiration of the term of limitation, but as to Article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Misappropriation or Embezzlement of other People’s Property), it remained. At the same time, the seven years’ term of imprisonment was reduced by six months. In April 2009, the Preobrazhensky District Court of Moscow took the decision pertaining to the early release on parole of the former Yukos lawyer Svetlana Bakamina.
INDIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE CASE. SVETLANA BAKHMINA AND BOREHOLE LIQUID
“From the verdict of the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow” against Khodorkovsky M.B., Lebedev P.L., from December 27, 2010, p. 178, p. 663):
“From the protocol, it becomes clear that the president of the meeting was Muravlenko, the president of the Board of Directors of the mentioned JSC and under control of Lebedev and Khodorkovsky, and on the question of approval of deals of buying and selling of oil and/or borehole liquid, a report was made by Bakhmina S.P.”
“The decision of the approval of all deals of buying and selling of oil and/or borehole liquid made by oil producing companies, as well as the approval of such deals that will be made in the future, were taken at the meetings of the shareholders of oil producing enterprises (…) On the question of the approval of the deals reported Bakhmina S.P. against whom a guilty verdict has been passed (the head of the legal department of the JSC “Yukos-Moskva”), she mislead the shareholders about the essence of these deals pretending that the price of the sold oil was determined by an independent appraiser, and in each concrete case would be corrected in reliance to market prices. According to the presented during the hearings proofs, the conclusion of the “independent appraiser”, in fact, was a knowingly false document, specially prepared at the instruction of Lebedev P.L., by another person, a member of this organized group, for the purpose of abetting the shareholders in taking unfounded decisions”, notes the website Prigovor.ru.
(See also the previous article “On this day, Leonid Nevzlin, the ordering customer of murders, lashed out at Kudrin”. The serial ordering customer of murders Leonid Nevzlin accused Kudrin, Medvedev, and Abramovich of all Yukos misfortunes. The shadow of Yukos in the attempted murder of Alexey Kudrin. The website Prigovor.ru reminds its readers of what happened on April 18, 2005).
