Monitoring the case of Vladimir Dovgalyuk (session 01/14/20)
01/14/2020 in the Bogunsky district court of Zhitomir, a hearing was held in the case of Vladimir Dovgalyuk, accused of the murder of the Zhytomyr businessman A. Zhadko, which occurred on July 11, 2014 (paragraph 7 of part 2 of article 115 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).
One of the victims did not appear at the hearing, having previously warned the court about poor health. By agreement of the participants in the trial, the session was held in his absence.
The court examined the evidence filed by the prosecution. The first to consider the findings of a forensic psychological examination, drawn up in 2015. The examination was carried out based on a video recording of the interrogation of V. Dovgalyuk as a witness. After the examination, the experts should have seen the video on which it was conducted. The defense objected to the study of this disc and filed a motion declaring the evidence inadmissible and terminating its investigation. According to paragraph 1 of Part 3 of Article 87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the testimony of the suspect (accused) given by him in the procedural status of a witness is unacceptable evidence. The representative of the victims objected to the defense’s request and explained to the court that the prosecution is also against the court accepting the testimony of the suspect as a witness in the video, but asks to investigate what the expert examined, namely the behavior of the witness.
The court retired to the deliberation room, after which it ruled to refuse to satisfy the request of the defense. The reason was that during the examination of the conclusion of the examination data, the appendix of which is a video disc, the participants in the court proceedings did not submit applications for the recognition of the conclusions of the examination as obviously inadmissible evidence. Due to the fact that the conclusion of the examination has already been investigated, in the court’s opinion, there are no grounds to recognize the video disc as an integral part of the evidence, obviously inadmissible.
The defense filed a new petition – to recognize the entire forensic psychological examination as unacceptable evidence. Since the disk with the video recording of the interrogation of the witness is unacceptable evidence and the source of the conclusion of the examination.
The court retired to the deliberation room, after which it issued a ruling: the motion of the defense to satisfy and recognize the forensic psychological examination as obviously inadmissible evidence. In this regard, it was decided to stop the study of this disk. Further, the court continued to investigate the evidence of the prosecution, namely the video recordings of surveillance cameras and the response of the Andrushev Observatory to a request regarding the time of dusk. The defense did not object to the examination of this evidence.
During the monitoring of the trial, no violations were recorded.
The next hearing is scheduled for February 11, 2020. Experts from the International Society for Human Rights will continue to monitor this trial.