Originally Syndicated on May 8, 2023 @ 7:46 am
Table of Contents
Attempts were made to bribe the court chairman
The shaman is the target of the St. Petersburg FSB’s greatest hunt. They want testimony against Nikulin, the head of the Kolpinsky District Court in St. Petersburg, as well as a sizable number of other people from him (in the status of the accused). Igor Leonenko, an employee of the UEBiPK in St. Petersburg, is the son of the deputy chairman of the TFR.
The FSB’s Department M alleges that Shaman offered them bribes. For viewers of our channel, Cheka-OGPU’s Telegram channel has posted a brief interview:
“I basically just knew people professionally, although I knew a lot of individuals from different areas.”
Regarding the criminal case, this is nothing more than the cliched retaliation of department M employees for the fact that I not only declined to partake in their provocations (the last sentence was 11/02/21: “merge” the chairman of the Kolpinsky District Court of St. Petersburg, Nikulin D.G.), but also reacted harshly to the last such proposal by issuing a statement to the military investigator Yevplov, who got scared and did not conduct an au Given their use of torture and ongoing unlawful operations, the reason why they are not on the road with M is trite, and the profile is not mine.I don’t know any of the Ministry of Internal Affairs personnel you identify in your publication, but they truly requested that I disparage them. I picked neither of the two evils and didn’t get involved in anybody else’s disassembling instead, sending M-ku to three recognizable letters.
I’ll explain my stance and why I don’t consider the police or the Cheka to be allies. I read what Elena Leonenko does and the legislation she proposes, and I observe how judges and all Ministry of Internal Affairs workers behave after being directed by M. to disparage them. I thus came to the conclusion that they are all the last remaining cowards who are not even prepared to defend themselves!
For instance, Leonenko may get a letter from a stranger asking him to disparage the man; in response, the stranger grinned and said, “Thanks, but these are not our problems” and added, “You hang on there.” All of the others on the list are identical! Therefore, I will only be happy if such cowards are transferred by the MFSB since a coward is not a man! However, I was not going to take part in this, and I will not.
Ki Chesnokov’s wallet is where he is seated.
“Well, if they come to me with a sword, then they will depart on a shield. I may clarify the following in addition to and in essence of my comment: On November 2, 2021, Alexander Vyacheslavovich Ivanov, a former employee of SII LLC, allegedly attempted to bribe Nikulin Dmitry Gennadievich, the head of the Kolpinsky District Court of St. Petersburg, under the direction of agents from the M department of the FSB for St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region, Sergey Zhuchik and Anton Voronkov.
Alexander Vyacheslavovich Ivanov, purportedly acting on the orders of the aforementioned workers “M,” contacted me via messenger after being recently released from places of deprivation of liberty (he was serving a sentence in FKU IK-5 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia in the St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region under Part 30 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
Votsap to the Chairman of the Kolpinsky District Court, Nikulin D.G., asking for help in “solving issues” in the Kolpinsky District Court and providing the messenger’s phone number. I sent a picture of the prior correspondence with the application.
I gave a firm no to this suggestion (about putting pressure on the judge, paying him a bribe, and engaging in other unlawful activities).
Ivanov A.V. is currently, to my knowledge, wholly under the control of “M” employees, and he is willing to engage in any provocations out of fear that the investigative and judicial authorities may increase his punishment in accordance with the punishment already imposed upon him.
The following events make a provocation against me and the head of the Kolpinsky District Court necessary:
- using provocation to neutralize me by inventing evidence for a criminal prosecution under Article 290-291.1 (bribery or the facilitation of bribery) or Article 159 (fraud) of the Russian Federation’s Criminal Code;
- The main objective is to remove me from the legal profession because I have been actively involved in revealing the theft of 5.5 billion rubles since 2019 in order to fulfill a defense order during the construction of particularly significant strategic facilities for the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense in Russia and at facilities for the ministry in Kazakhstan. The Ministry of Internal Affairs’ SD is handling the case of A.G. Chesnokov, who is now in custody.
Officials from the Joint Stock Company “EMK-Engineering Company” (OGRN 1027700155625), including Andrey Gennadievich Chesnokov, Sergey Stanislavovich Shtykov, and Evgeny Stanislavovich Shtykov, carried out the heist. I was one of the people who started the criminal prosecution of Chesnokov’s OPS, and I had previously given some information to the investigation and lawyer Sergey Anatolyevich Musatov (reg. No. 77/8431 in the register of lawyers in Moscow) about their and other people’s involvement in the theft from the Ministry of Defense.
We have now determined a high degree of possibility of involvement in the theft of workers from the department M of the FSB, working with Musatov S.A.
Support for criminal activities
According to our information, Chesnokov A.G. previously obtained support for his criminal activities from unnamed employees of the M Department of the FSB of the Russian Federation and the M Department of the FSB for St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region. Together, they devised a plan to shield their companies from inspections by inciting the giving of bribes or fabricating criminal cases against law enforcement officers.
Shtykov S.S. and Shtykov E.S., along with employees of the department M of the FSB (and in St. Petersburg, together with the department M of the FSB), stole money from Chesnokov A.G., Shtykov S.S., and Shtykov E.S., according to police officers and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation.
A combination was carried out, during which a “third person” confirmed the fact that bribes were demanded (but weren’t, in reality), in order to end official inspections.
The FSB’s Department M employees at the very least seized and destroyed the check materials related to the companies of Chesnokov and the Shtykov brothers, and at the very least arrested officials from among the Ministry of Internal Affairs staff. This organization held three events comparable to them in 2018–2019, and each time, department M or department M of the FSB received applications.
However, Chesnokov A.G. was detained in 2020 on suspicion of embezzling 500 million rubles, in part thanks to the information I gave at the time. The remaining theft incidents, totaling 5.5 billion rubles, are being prepared to be presented to it by the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense.
Ivanov A.V., who had previously worked with Chesnokov, Shtykov, and department “M” on the destruction of inspection materials against CJSC UK “OPEK” at the end of 2019 (Appendix No. 1), participated in the provocation scheme to eliminate Shaman A.V.
Knowing that Ivanov A.V. is serving a sentence in FKU IK-5 UFSIN in the St. Petersburg and Leningrad regions and that his sentence of 2 years and 6 months of general regime, including the time of house arrest, is about to expire, department “M” employees took action.
To further compel Ivanov A.V. into taking part in illegal provocative schemes, “Metallostroy” created a criminal pressure tactic. Operational officers Zhuchik and Korotchenkov successfully subordinated Ivanov A.V. by often visiting IK-5 of the UFSIN in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region. Ivanov A.V. provided additional confirmation after taking into consideration the facts that had been disclosed to the public concerning the M FSB department’s approach to dealing with the group of penal colonies it oversees.
Two years after the entry of the verdict against Ivanov A.V. force, a review of the sentence against Ivanova A. on newly discovered circumstances in the St. Petersburg City Court was presumably organized with the assistance of employees of the prosecutor’s office controlled and also supervised by the “M” department. The decision to overturn the verdict was only approved for the fifth time, which is evidence of “pushing through”.
Ivanov A.V.’s sentence was revoked on August 31, 2021, by order of the St. Petersburg City Court, and the case was returned for a new trial. Ivanov A.V. presumably faced a decision: either they increase his punishment or he starts collaborating with the “M” department and taking part in provocations. Ivanov A.V. consents to cooperate with the “M” division.
Knowing that Ivanov A.V. and I get along well, the staff at department “M” gave Ivanov A.V. the order to propose to provide Nikulin D.G., the head of the Kolpinsky district court, a bribe.
Ivanov A.V. picked Nikulin D.G., as I would anticipate. It is no accident that the Kolpinsky Court handles matters pertaining to the release of those detained at IK-5 “Metallostroy” in St. Petersburg.
At least 3 people were required to provide an accurate image of the bribe: the bribe supplier (Ivanov himself), the middleman (myself), and the recipient (Judge Nikulin D.G.). I was intended to be arrested at any meeting with Ivanov, and from what I gather, the money was supposed to be thrown in, in accordance with the provocation of the crime.
It was determined to use my detention and incarceration as leverage on Judge D.G. Nikulin in an effort to “recruit” Nikulin D.G. because I had no connection to him. The department M of the UFSB in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region generated this combination precisely in the same manner as earlier combinations.
Additionally, we can say with certainty that I would have been arrested and would have stopped trying to stop Chesnokov A. G. and Shtykov E. S. from embezzling money if my actions had been considered in the future to be in violation of Article 159 or Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Retaliation for not giving false testimony
Additionally, the staff of the “M” department attempted to avenge me in this way for refusing to provide false testimony against Igor Leonenko, Soshnev, and Mikhailov, employees of the UEBiPK of the Main Department of Internal Affairs of St. Petersburg, who conducted an audit of CJSC earlier in 2019 for “UK OPEC. Leonenko is the son of the deputy chairman of the TFR, Elena Leonenko.
I am prepared to testify in court to the events as stated since I am familiar with Article 306 of the Russian Federation’s Criminal Code. I am aware of Article 51 of the Russian Federation Constitution.
For more articles, click on the link given below:
https://monitor.financescam.com/kevin-mcmullen
