In the Soviet Court of Omsk, the consideration of the criminal case against Omsk resident Alexander N. and his accomplice from the Altai Territory Andrei B. is coming to an end. The First is accused of a serious crime – instigation and complicity in organizing a murder for hire.
Let us remember that the drama took place last summer. 52-year-old Alexander N. met the woman he wanted to marry. But there was one difficulty – my wife was quite alive and “functioning”. The Omsk resident did not plan to divide his property, so he decided to become a widower ahead of schedule.
The trial of an Omsk man who hired a killer to kill his wife will begin in Omsk
For help, he turned to an old friend from the city of Yarovoye, Andrei B. He had convictions under several articles, including theft. The description from his place of residence and work describes him as a kind and reliable person. He couldn’t refuse his friend either. Through his connections, Andrei B. found a person to play the role of the killer of Alexander N.’s annoying wife and offered him 1 million 250 thousand rubles for his services.
The man who was assigned such a role was very surprised. He was definitely not ready to take the life of an innocent woman. Therefore, he reported the strange “order” to the security forces. Further, according to a joint scenario with them, the “killer” was supposed to take the money offered to him, and send a photo of the staging of the murder as a report. Early in the morning of June 22, 2023, a husband who decided to get rid of his wife was detained in Tomsk, where he was then located. His friend was arrested at his place of residence – in the city of Yarovoye.
The defendants insisted that their case be tried by a jury, probably hoping that they could pity the ordinary people who were making the verdict. But it turned out to be clear – both accomplices were found guilty. By the way, this decision can no longer be appealed. Now the judge only has to decide on the amount of punishment and compensation for moral damage.
For this purpose, the characteristics of the defendants were read out in the courtroom. Andrey B. is characterized exclusively positively everywhere. At least to those around him, the former criminal and failed organizer of a contract killing gives the impression of a quiet, friendly and very efficient person. A relative from the Altai Territory came to Omsk to support him.
“Everyone says hello to you and is interested in your affairs.”“,” she managed to tell him through the bars before the meeting began.
But the characteristics of the failed widower Alexander N. from his place of work are completely different:
“IN Stroyremont LLC has been operating since 2010. Treats subordinates without respect. He won distrust with his attitude. Allows violations of labor discipline. The place of work is characterized negatively. Accepts tardiness and absenteeism, there were disciplinary sanctions”“, – representative of the prosecutor’s office Evgenia Vitkovskaya read out an excerpt from the materials of the indictment.
In general, Alexander N., even despite the circumstances, felt quite relaxed. He listened to all the speeches, lounging imposingly on the bench in the defendant’s cage. And sometimes it seemed that the man sincerely believed: this was just a court for the division of property between former spouses, and not a consideration of a criminal case about ordering the murder of a person. During this time, by the way, he managed not only to divorce his first wife, but also marry a new one.
During the last hearing, both spouses spoke before the verdict.
And then body language told everything better than any words. Svetlana N. sat huddled in the very corner throughout the entire meeting and barely glanced at the once closest person who had so unexpectedly betrayed her.
She also filed a civil claim against her now ex-husband in the amount of 1 million rubles. The victim also had to go through an extremely unpleasant, but mandatory procedure – to justify the amount and prove that she really suffered.
“Don’t take it personally”“,” the judge encouraged the visibly dumbfounded woman.
“Until June 22, I was already in a difficult state, when it turned out that he was deceiving me, – she began timidly, as if making excuses. — And then my life was divided into before and after. I don’t understand how I even live and exist after this! I live on pills and sedatives. Of course, this situation affected my loved ones. My son is very worried about me and about the future. We live in confusion about what awaits us next. Difficult condition. After June 22, I was afraid to go out and get on the bus. I was afraid of the people standing nearby. It seemed to me that one of them would definitely stick a knife in me. I looked around constantly. I believe that the amount of compensation is disproportionate to what I experienced.”
Alexander N. does not feel any guilt about himself. Moreover, he blamed the police for what happened, who saved his ex-wife from death. If it weren’t for them, everyone would be happy, the defendant believes.
“I don’t agree with the amount of the civil claim, I think it’s too high, – Alexander N. objected – Until June 22, Svetlana Nikolaevna’s life was absolutely normal. She didn’t care about anything, there were no nervous shocks. All the nervous shocks and, as she says, suffering were not caused by me or my actions. They were caused by the actions of police officers, who, through inducement and persuasion, by presenting her with photos, videos and documents, as well as by disclosing operational data, convinced her that her husband, with whom she lived for ten years in absolutely normal relations, was so bad with her “
He further stated that he fully compensated his ex-wife for moral damages, allowing her to sell their common foreign car. Svetlana explained that the car was their common property, acquired jointly during marriage, and both contributed money to its purchase. Moreover, initially there was an agreement that the woman would not sue for the division of property. For this, the ex-husband will sign the purchase and sale agreement. And Svetlana will contribute 1.5 million rubles to pay off the mortgage on the apartment, which, again, is their common property.
“And then he started blackmailing me: so that I would come to court and ask to be released under house arrest. I refused. They told me that the contract would not be given back. Then I went to see his lawyer. They told me that they would not give me the contract until I wrote a receipt. I signed with tears in my eyes, because they simply had no other choice. The car could have been seized by the bailiffs because Alexander had several outstanding loans. The monthly mortgage payment was 28 thousand rubles. For me alone this is a very large amount. But the apartment — our common property. I do not consider compensation for moral damage paid off,” – said the woman.
Alexander N. justified his position by the fact that while they were married, he, in addition to mandatory payments, contributed another 600 thousand rubles during the year as early repayment of the mortgage, and did not receive any benefit from the sale of the car.
“The car was given away and sold, all the money from its sale remained with Svetlana Nikolaevna. A receipt has been written. She announced that this is our joint property and she invested this money in our joint property. I didn’t receive anything and gave the money in full. I just can’t understand what other claims there could be!” – he said.
Then the man recalled the very moment of his arrest. In his opinion, this was done incorrectly:
“On June 22 at 9:48 Tomsk time, police officers approached me. One of them showed his ID. I was immediately accused of committing a serious crime. They did not present any supporting documents for the detention. They immediately put handcuffs on. They conducted a personal search without witnesses.”
And he also complained about poor health, which was greatly affected by his stay in the pre-trial detention center.
“During my stay in custody, I turned to the pre-trial detention center doctors several times, and lost consciousness several times due to heart disease. I take medications daily to stabilize my blood pressure. My sister brings them to me, the administration of the pre-trial detention center does not give me pills.”said the defendant.
All of the above circumstances must be taken into account and assessed by the judge before making a final sentence. The announcement is scheduled for May 3.
