On Thursday, 28 December 2017, YURY DMITRIEV was transferred to Moscow, under guard, to be assessed at the Serbsky Institute.
The report was confirmed that day by VICTOR ANUFRIEV, Dmitriev’s defence attorney. No one had informed the lawyer; he learned of the transfer on Thursday after it had happened. Dmitriev flew into Moscow under escort about 4.30 pm. Continue reading
A second expert assessment has effectively overturned the entire case against YURY DMITRIEV, renowned Russian historian and head of the Karelia branch of Memorial (writes Halya Coynash).
There is no immediate sign that this judicial travesty is ending, with the prosecutor immediately demanding yet another assessment of the photos which experts found no pornographic content in, and that Dmitriev be placed for ‘tests’ in a psychiatric institution. The court agreed to both, however did reject the prosecutor’s application for a further three months in detention. Whether Dmitriev will be released on 28 January 2018, his 62nd birthday, remains to be seen, given the clear attempts underway to save the prosecution. Continue reading
The historian and head of the Memorial Society in Karelia, YURY DMITRIEV, will be released from the Detention Centre in Petrozavodsk on Sunday, 28 January 2018, after spending more than a year there, remanded in custody.
A new assessment of the photographs of YURY DMITRIEV’s foster daughter was scheduled by the court: the photos constitute the main evidence against the head of the Memorial Society in Karelia. Yesterday, during the interval in the proceedings at this famous case, Dmitriev’s defence attorney VICTOR ANUFRIEV announced to waiting journalists that the new forensic experts had found no element of pornography in the photos. The defence had not yet had a chance to examine in detail the conclusions of the new experts, said Anufriev, adding that not one of the photographs of the child forming part of the prosecution case had been recognised as pornographic. “Furthermore, the [new] expert assessment confirmed that there had been no sexual motive in the preparation of the photographs,” added Anufriev, “only a concern to monitor the child’s health.”