The topic of counteraction to the investigation, opportunistic...

Read completely

This work is devoted to the circumstances of the investigation into the murder of the general director of Public Russian Television, the famous television journalist Vladislav Nikolaevich Listyev. It describes the features preliminary investigation on one of the most resonant crimes in the criminal history of Russia in the 90s of the last century.
The author, as far as possible in the conditions of an unfinished investigation, lifted the veil of secrecy over some aspects of this case. The book provides specific facts about the behavior of famous politicians, journalists, and leaders law enforcement when conducting investigative actions with their participation or when discussing the progress of the investigation. Are given brief characteristics some members of the investigative team. The author also talks about international legal cooperation with representatives of law enforcement agencies of a number of foreign countries.
The topic of counteraction to the investigation and the opportunistic use of this media in this regard is also not ignored.
The book is intended for a wide range of readers, and primarily for people who knew and loved Vladislav Listyev well from his popular television programs in the 80s - 90s of the last century.

Hide IS THE AGE OF Crimson JACKETS BACK?

Yuri SKURATOV, Prosecutor General in 1995-1999:
“Such accidental deaths do not happen, especially since the killers knew exactly where Kozlov was, when and where he was moving. As a rule, such crimes are handled quite seriously.
All contract killings are based on economic interest, a conflict situation over some big money. Since the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is a special institution, there may be several versions: either Kozlov promised something to someone, received the money and did not do what he promised, or, on the contrary, for some reason he did not give people the opportunity to make money on something, took an obstructive position.
Why is all this bad? It turns out that officials of our banking system at such a high level are still within the reach of crime. This means that the banking system has changed little over the years. We thought it was all over, but it turns out not.

Petr TRIBOY, former investigator for particularly important cases of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation (Listyev’s case):
- There are fewer high-profile contract killings compared to the nineties. I think the work of arbitration courts has had an impact, that is, businesses have the opportunity to solve various critical problems in the legal field. There were contract killings under socialism as well. Their number depends not only on the quality of the work of law enforcement agencies, but also on how perfect the legal field is. Unfortunately, in our country it is far from ideal, therefore, when a business reaches a dead end, it is tempted to solve the problem in a radical way. Some of its representatives choose not the state with its insufficiently developed legislation, but a killer as an arbiter.

Vladimir DANILOV, former investigator for particularly important cases of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation (explosion at the Kotlyakovsky cemetery):
- Civil servants of this level, who oversee very dangerous issues that lead to serious conflicts, must be protected, at least behind the scenes. What we have here is that officials, whom no one will even remember, travel accompanied by jeeps with armed submachine gunners. And the leaders who are at the forefront of the attack walk with one guard. This is a clear miscalculation on the part of the state.

Gennady GUDKOV, State Duma Committee on Security:
- I don’t think that now we have some kind of repetition of the situation of the 90s. And in any case, with regard to contract killings, which, in my opinion, have become rare. I am not saying that life has become safer, but I associate the reasons for the reduction in cases of such radical showdowns with the work of the investigative authorities. Crimes of this kind have begun to be revealed - now they can be solved.
On the other hand, such government attention to the work of law enforcement and investigative agencies leads to “tightening the screws,” and this, in turn, results in major conflicts of interest. I mean pressure on customs and banks. For people with an old mentality, this is a reason to “order” the offender.
Now the prosecutor's office is working in a new way, the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs are trying to justify the budgetary funds invested in them. Therefore, skipping contract killings is not beneficial in a hardware sense. In the case of Kozlov, investigators, of course, will dig into the ground.

"Novaya Gazeta" No. 71

18.09.2006

March 1 marked 20 years since the murder of a television journalist and head of the Public Russian Television Vladislav Listyeva. One of the most notorious crimes in modern Russian history officially remains unsolved, although official representative of the Investigative Committee of Russia Vladimir Markin and stated, that “the case is not closed and will not be closed until it is solved.”

Former Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Yuri Skuratov gave interview with Rosbalt, in which he states that already in the 1990s, both the perpetrators and those who ordered the crime were actually identified:

"Investigator Petr Triboi came close to the perpetrators, organizer and customer of the crime. This was evident at least from the fact that he began to receive threats. The tribe could only systematize these personalities and consolidate the evidence. But then the Kremlin intervened in the situation, I was removed from the post of prosecutor general, and no charges were brought against anyone,”- Skuratov said.

If Ernst had said then during the investigation what he now told the journalist, the murder might have been solved many years ago."

Yuri Skuratov

​“When I was Prosecutor General, the investigation’s problems largely lay in the reluctance of Listyev’s friends to share information, although they knew a lot.

If only (CEO of Channel One) Ernst said then during the investigation what he now told the journalist, the murder might have been solved many years ago,” Skuratov is sure.

Konstantin Ernst stated in interview, which was published on the Snob website on April 4 that the person who ordered the murder of journalist Vladislav Listyev is a businessman Sergey Lisovsky. Ernst, according to the journalist Evgeniy Levkovich, forbade him to publish the material. At the moment, the text of the interview is available only to subscribers of Snob magazine, but a copy of the document is stored in the Google cache.

“In the 1990s, most of Listyev’s friends showed cowardice: having a large amount of information about the circumstances preceding the crime, they hid it,”- Skuratov notes.

Twenty years ago, investigators considered the main version according to which Vladislav Listyev was killed to be the redistribution of the advertising business on television:

"Boris Berezovsky Helping Listyev head ORT was not at all with the best intentions. Through Vladislav, he planned to remove competitors - major players in the advertising market, and then gain control over all financial flows from advertising. After his appointment, Listyev decided that he was an independent player. Listyev had no intention of handing over control over advertising to Berezovsky, and thus turned from an ally into a burden for him."- says Skuratov.

Then, according to him, “Boris Abramovich realized that with Vladislav “you can’t make porridge”... A serious conflict began”

The investigation, according to Skuratov, came to the conclusion that Berezovsky knew what fate was in store for Listyev, and therefore, shortly before the crime, he left the country. “Vladislav’s death was to his advantage, but still, as the investigation suspected, he was not the orderer of the murder. Another person gave the order to kill Listyev.”

Skuratov does not directly name Lisovsky, limiting himself to hints.

According to Skuratov, Berezovsky hid from the investigation that literally on the eve of the murder he had a long conversation with Listyev. A recording of this conversation existed, but was not confiscated: “of course, this was an error of the investigation,” Skuratov admits.

On March 1, 1995, late in the evening, Vlad Listyev was shot dead by hired killers in the entrance of his own house on Novokuznetskaya Street in Moscow.

Despite the fact that the murder was clearly ordered in nature, and most of the defendants involved in the order were identified within one and a half to two years from the moment the murder was committed, no conviction was ever made, and the perpetrator of the tragedy has not been convicted to this day.

During the search activities and many years of investigation, several investigators were replaced, and the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Yu. Skuratov, who had the maximum amount of information on this case, was dismissed.

15 years after the murder, Listyev’s case was suspended and sent to the archives after the statute of limitations had expired, but the investigation was resumed last year on instructions from the President of the Russian Federation.

Vlad's killers and customers were identified back in the 1990s

At the time of the murder, all the airtime of Channel 1 was shared equally by three companies: InterVid, headed by V. Listyev, Premier-SV of Lisovsky and BSG of Gleb Bokiy.

At some point, Listyev was tired of the miserable existence of the most popular and powerful media platform in the country, and he addressed Boris Yeltsin live on Channel 1 with a question about when the TV channel will be funded properly, and when producers will be able to engage in creativity, and not by searching for money to create programs and pay salaries to employees.

Berezovsky was involved in the murder, but...

Around this period, in the anthology of Listyev’s contract killing, the name of Boris Berezovsky appears, who, taking advantage of his proximity to the first person of the state, managed to convince President Yeltsin that Channel 1 should be privatized, making it half state, half private enterprise. This will help attract private investment for the development of the TV channel, but at the same time preserve it as an instrument of state propaganda.

This idea seemed right to Yeltsin, and so, at the end of January 1995, Vlad Listyev became not just the favorite presenter of the whole country and producer of all post-perestroika programs on Channel 1, but also the general director. What is important, under the patronage of Mr. Berezovsky.

This decision of Listyev not only seriously harmed, but actually destroyed Lisovsky’s extremely profitable, million-dollar business, which, according to numerous sources, at that time was deeply indebted.

Moreover, in the 90s, racketeering actively flourished, and Lisovsky’s company had to pay considerable monthly “profits” to the Solntsevo organized crime group, the absence of which already endangered the life of Lisovsky himself.

The version that the oligarch Berezovsky was the direct orderer of the murder of Vlad Listyev was initially key for Skuratov/Triboy, but it did not pass numerous truth checks. Investigators came to the conclusion that Berezovsky was in fact involved in this crime, but indirectly.

According to the testimony of Vlad’s wife, Albina Nazimova, they turned to Berezovsky for help with a request to protect Vlad literally a day before the murder. Vlad received threats and foresaw trouble, perhaps even had insider information about placing an “order” on him and asked Berezovsky to resolve the issue - to stop the “order”.

However, the oligarch at that moment decided to leave everything as it was and not to interfere, because although Listyev was initially his protégé, in the post of general director of Channel 1, however, unfortunately for himself, he could not become a controlled doll in the hands of Berezovsky. Therefore, Boris Abramovich instantly lost interest in him and did not consider it necessary to act as a defender. Most likely, because he knew who exactly was standing over Lisovsky.

Ernst's version

The version about the direct involvement of Sergei Lisovsky in placing the “order” for Vlad Listyev was also voiced by K. Ernst in scandalous interview journalist E. Levkovich. The audio version of the interview is freely available on the Internet.
The printed version was published in 2013 on the website of the Snob magazine on the journalist’s personal blog.

During an interview for one of the Western magazines, the phrase appears in the dialogue between the journalist and K. Ernst: “I know who ordered the murder of Vlad Listyev.” After this, Ernst asks Levkovich to turn off the recorder and off-records utters a phrase, the essence of which is that he is sure that it was Sergei Lisovsky who ordered Listyev, but after so many years it is very difficult to prove.

This revelation did not become available immediately, but 5 years after the meeting. Journalist Levkovich commented on this by saying that the concept of off-records has important ethical significance for him (in world journalistic practice it is customary to maintain the information secret of the interviewee if the conversation took place without a voice recorder at his request), however, the gravity of the information received still forced him to make the facts public .

Ernst himself, although he officially uttered a streamlined phrase

“This is exactly what I didn’t tell Levkovich...”, however, to this day he openly declares on Channel 1 that he knew and knows the orderer of Listyev’s murder, but for certain reasons he cannot say his name.

After the scandal with Ernst’s revelation, an information leak appeared online about Ernst’s alleged suicide attempt after he slandered Senator Lisovsky. Not a single official source picked up the canard; neither Ernst nor Lisovsky gave a single informative comment on this fact.

It was necessary to confuse the investigation

Throughout the entire investigation, employees of the Investigative Committee and the prosecutor's office were faced with the fact that every now and then they tried to deliberately set the investigation on the wrong trail and in every possible way prevented the receipt of information.

Starting with the shell casings left at the crime scene and the folder with interviews with witnesses, which were returned to the police by friends and defenders of Listyev’s family, and ending with the appearance of 33 people who at different times confessed to Vlad’s murder. Confessions were made, as a rule, by people from brigade organized crime groups, and the elaboration of each such version delayed the investigation for at least six months.

By order from above, a lot of time was spent on carefully working out a version of the order for the murder of Listyev’s wife, Albina, in order to obtain an inheritance.

And, of course, the notorious Masonic trace. It is no secret that Vlad Listyev covered and made public many pressing and political issues within the framework of the “Vzglyad” and “Tema” programs, which means that the investigation had to check whether Jews or Zionists were the masterminds of this unprecedented murder in the media environment.

Who is behind all this?

As soon as the Skuratov/Triboy team came close to the version of the probable involvement of Sergei Lisovsky, accumulated enough testimony and evidence, was able to identify and find out the location of the direct perpetrators, and track the criminal trail that followed Lisovsky, they received a command from above to reject the version and stop development.

The investigator, and after him the prosecutor, were removed from the case, and the direct perpetrators of the murder, the Ageikin brothers, died one after another, as is often said, under strange circumstances.

Banned version

After the removal of Vlad Listyev from the case and his resignation, the former General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation Yuri Skuratov wrote a book in which he outlined a version according to which it was possible to move as close as possible to the solution, but which was officially banned at the final stage before the case was solved.

The logic of the most probable version according to Skuratov/Triboy was as follows:

Vlad Listyev, thanks to his natural talent and high professionalism, becomes the most beloved and significant journalist in Russia in the 90s. He is the king of live broadcasting, his word is trusted by everyone without exception, his programs can start and stop strikes and control public opinion one hundred percent. From boring Soviet television, the main channel is turning into the prototype of the current ORT. After perestroika, journalism begins to blossom, and the financial condition of television media, on the contrary, begins to rot.

Listyev brings the problem of the channel’s financial insecurity to discussion with President Yeltsin and does it live.

The owners of airtime on Channel 1 become first 3, and then 2 companies - InterVid and Premier-SV. And if in the first case the money goes directly into the hands of the producer of TV shows on Channel 1 Listyev, then in the second into the hands directly of Sergei Lisovsky.

Thanks to Listyev, the whole country watched TV in the mid-90s. By 1995, everyone could also appreciate the significance and, most importantly, the monetary value of television broadcasts: the state, the criminals, the special services, and the first oligarchs.

For airtime, a real massacre begins, in which the channel itself gets the crumbs, and the bulk of the money goes further through Lisovsky’s company.

The most cunning person in this war turns out to be none other than Berezovsky. He persuades Yeltsin to sign a decree on the privatization of Channel 1 according to the scheme: half to the state, half to LogoVaz (Berezovsky’s company), he also proposes to appoint a talented and authoritative media manager, Vladislav Listyev, as director of ORT.

During this period, unwanted journalists and public figures They are liquidating one after another, contract killings are widespread, and therefore Vlad Listyev begins to fear for his life. He tells his friends and family that his situation in terms of resolving the security issue is very bad, and literally a day before his murder, Vlad and his wife come to the LogoVaz office for a conversation with Berezovsky, during which he asks for help and protection of his life and family.

Berezovsky may promise to help, but realizing the level of “assault” organized against Listyev, he decides not to interfere, because a priori he already has 50% of ORT shares, and therefore, in fact, he no longer needs Listyev. With his non-interference, he makes Vlad's death inevitable.

Popular love and popularity could not protect Vlad from two bullets fired on the staircase landing by killer Ageikin (a former paratrooper and member of a St. Petersburg organized crime group). The first bullet pierced the shoulder, the second the temporal lobe of the general director of Channel 1.

The death of the people's chosen one shocks the public and terrifies the journalistic community in Moscow. With the death of Listyev, a cynical contract killing for the sake of money and power enters the home of everyone living in Russia. The meager cost of human life becomes completely obvious. Shock and hatred, the capital's streets are drowning in crowds of people and flowers.

President Yeltsin apologizes live on air for not saving the legend and takes personal control of the investigation.

The most likely mastermind of the crime is Sergei Lisovsky. The perpetrators are members of the St. Petersburg organized crime group, the Ageikin brothers.

It is most likely that Lisovsky did not single-handedly make the decision to liquidate Listyev; the authorities of the St. Petersburg organized crime group stood above him, and someone else stood above the authorities.

Despite the presence of a sufficient amount of evidence and testimony in the case materials, Sergei Lisovsky is not allowed to be brought to justice by order from above. After a short time, the direct suspects in the execution of the order, the Ageikin brothers, leave for another world.

And investigator Triboi and Prosecutor General Skuratov are removed from the case.

President Yeltsin’s personal control over the case lasted until he left office; not a single suspect from the Skuratov/Triboy version was ever brought to justice.

After the statute of limitations expired, after 15 years, 200 volumes of the criminal case on the death of Vlad Listyev were written off to the archives, however, due to the continuing demands of the concerned public, the President of the Russian Federation, V. Putin, gave the order to resume the case of solving the murder of V. Listyev.

hope dies last

Both Yu. Skuratov and P. Triboi today, without looking back and directly, say that the case of Vlad Listyev could have been solved in the 90s, and can be solved now. By virtue of the law on the presumption of innocence, none of them directly accuse the defendants in the case, but they clearly hint that Vlad Listyev’s customers are still public to this day, and therefore, even after 21 years from the date of his death, no one has the opportunity bring the matter to resolution.

And yet, the scale of the personality of the murdered man, as well as the presence of an acute public and journalistic community interest in this case that has not subsided for decades, leaves, albeit illusory, hope for fair retribution.

The material was prepared on the basis of open sources.

Elena Petrova

"PETER TRIBOY" Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant" CONFESSION OF INVESTIGATOR Petr..."

-- [ Page 1 ] --

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

PETER TRIBOY

“Murder of Listyev.

An investigation that has become irrelevant"

CONFESSION OF AN INVESTIGATOR

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Opening speech by Yu.I. Skuratova

Preface

Murder of Listyev

Features of the investigation

Relations with the media

Interrogations of Berezovsky B.A. and his “help” to the investigation

The story of the publication of Forbes magazine (Forbes)

The role of Prosecutor General Skuratov in the investigation

Strikes at the investigation

Group investigators

Assistance from foreign colleagues to the investigation

Grimaces of the investigation

Strange changes in the investigative department of the Prosecutor General's Office

Resignation

My investigative corridors

Sad reflections

Afterword

Photos

Another circumstance is connected with the personality of Peter Triboi himself. We are talking not only about one of the most trained and competent investigators of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia, but also about an exceptionally decent, principled and honest person who firmly stands on the position of law, honor and justice, which in modern conditions is becoming a rarity.

His fate, his life path, most of which took place during the “wild 90s”, gives a comprehensive picture of the difficulties and problems faced by our law enforcement system.

It took a lot of effort to persuade P.G. Triboy to take up his pen. I first made this attempt after meeting Paul Klebnikov back in 2003, who told me about his work on a book dedicated to the murder of Listyev. But, being a modest person by nature, Petr Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Georgievich sincerely believed that his considerations, thoughts about the peculiarities of the investigator’s work, the morals that reigned in law enforcement agencies, did not deserve such close attention.

And only arguments about the uniqueness of Listyev’s case, the need to convey the truth to the reader, to clear real facts from all verbal garbage in the conditions of an unfinished investigation helped correct the situation, and put Pyotr Georgievich at his desk. And this is very important, since it was he, as the head of the investigative and operational group in this case, who had the largest amount of operational and investigative information.

At the same time, I would like to immediately warn the reader who wants to get a “complete breakdown” of this case to become familiar with the most intimate secrets of the investigation. Pyotr Georgievich, being a professional “to the core,” understands perfectly well that the murder has not yet been solved; the case, although suspended, has not yet lost the final prospect of being solved.

The people who committed this crime live among us and are greedily catching any information about this investigation in order to evade responsibility. The connection between investigative secrecy and official ethics made certain adjustments to the work of P.G. Triboy, but that didn't make it any less interesting. Into the orbit of the investigation, one way or another, interesting personalities who played a significant role in political life Russia (B. Yeltsin, T. Dyachenko, B. Berezovsky, heads of law enforcement agencies of the country, etc.) Their actions and actions, previously unknown to the general reader, are shown by the author. He lifted the curtain on some aspects of the activities of the prosecutor's office, organizing the investigation of criminal cases, which are usually rarely covered. Although fragmentary, it very convincingly shows the mechanism of counteracting the investigation, which law enforcement officers one way or another have to face when investigating serious, socially significant crimes.

The complex topic of the relationship between the investigation and the journalistic corps in connection with the murder of V. Listyev is presented quite convincingly.

Sharing the justified indignation and indignation of Vlad’s professional colleagues, their desire to have any information about the progress of the investigation, the persons involved in the case, etc., the author cannot ignore the facts Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

opportunistic use of this information in political purposes to put pressure on law enforcement agencies.

P. Triboy, like the author of these lines, was deeply disappointed by the indifferent attitude of the majority of media representatives in connection with the refusal of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation to resume the investigation of the “Listyev case” after receiving the sensational confessions of the head of the First Channel of Russian Television, Konstantin Ernst. If only we could really remember Vlad and show integrity and perseverance!

The truthfulness and objectivity of Pyotr Georgievich should be especially emphasized when presenting all the events. He provides absolutely reliable facts and gives them an objective assessment. It is impossible not to note the inner modesty of the author, who, in fact, was the most successful investigator of those who worked on this case and came closest to solving this crime, without completing the investigation due to circumstances beyond his control.

One can only regret that the book is relatively small in volume and the author has not outlined even half of what he knows about. But I hope that the time to tell the whole truth will come... Actual State Counselor of Justice

–  –  –

I was asked to write about one of the most resonant crimes of the 90s - the murder of the famous television journalist Vladislav Listyev 16 years ago. Moreover, journalists, publishers, and people who knew me well contacted me. For various reasons, I did not dare to touch on this topic for a long time.

And I even agreed with internal disapproval, although it did not depend on me, with the publication in the early 2000s of a book by the former Prosecutor General of Russia Yuri Ilyich Skuratov entitled “Who Killed Vlad Listyev.”

21 years have passed since the murder of Vlad. During this time, a lot has calmed down... In a word, “there are no others, and those are far away.” And the current attempt to talk about the investigation into this case is not being made for the sake of PR. I don’t need any publicity, especially against the backdrop of such a high-profile crime.

This would be immoral in relation to the memory of the murdered person. I am not going to run anywhere and am not applying for any positions.

There are persistent myths about this investigation, and I consider it my moral responsibility to dispel at least some of them. And, if I succeed, then I will consider that the present narrative has justified itself. I’ll tell you mainly about what remained in my memory against my will. Mark Twain advised: “Tell the truth and then you won’t have to remember anything.” Following the wisdom of the classic, I will tell only the truth, because it is easier to tell the story this way.

I will also tell you about the circumstances of the investigation of this crime that remained “behind the scenes.” So that the reader understands what I mean, I will give the following example: the investigator conducted a search, interrogated the person, performed another investigative action and, in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, drew up a protocol. In the protocol, he is obliged to describe the procedural actions in the order in which they were carried out and state the statements of the persons participating in this. During interrogation, the testimony of the interrogated person is recorded, as far as possible, verbatim in the first person. Meanwhile, many nuances remain that the investigator is not obliged to record in the protocol. Where do you put your personal feelings, impressions of specific people and their actions. This and other things, among other things, will be discussed in my story.

Or here's another one. How many people know that the first defendants in the “case of the gang of Novokuznetsk killers Labotsky, Barybin and others” were detained as part of the investigation into the murder of Listyev. Having then accepted the case Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

"killers" to their production, a brilliant senior "important"

The Prosecutor General's Office Valery Evgrafovich Kostarev brought it to its logical conclusion. 32 people were brought to criminal responsibility for committing over a hundred different grave and especially grave crimes.

Of these, more than 40 were murders. That was the time of the so-called “dashing 90s”.

In addition, few people know that during the investigation of Listyev’s murder, more than 10 people were identified and prosecuted for committing other crimes, in respect of whom they did not receive sufficient information to bring charges in the case we are investigating.

Listyev was killed shortly after his appointment as General Director of ORT (Russian Public Television). The above facts indicate that his murder had far-reaching consequences for the criminal world. It dealt a crushing blow and put an end to one of the most brutal killer gangs of the time. Already being among those “who went into eternity,” Vlad, by his death, prompted law enforcement officers to interrupt the bloody conveyor belt and cut off the head of the most dangerous hydra. The subsequent arrests and prosecution of members of the criminal community made it possible to save more than one human life. The country has become cleaner - there is one less gang.

Murder of Listyev

On March 1, 1995, I was at home when, in the evening, in an emergency episode of the NTV channel, TV presenter Tatyana Mitkova reported that the General Director of Public Russian Television, the idol, as she said, of millions of people, Vlad Listyev, had just been killed in the entrance of her own house on Novokuznetskaya Street.

This sad news sent a chill through my body, since it was difficult to even imagine that this could happen to Listyev. Vlad was so popular that it seemed that nothing bad could happen to him. The crime literally shocked the whole country, since, without exaggeration, Vlad was a popular favorite. Many people cried for him.

In addition to regretting what happened, I thought, I don’t “envy” the investigator who will be assigned to investigate this murder. At that time, I, senior investigator for particularly important cases of the Investigative Committee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Russia could not even imagine that a year and seven months later I would be assigned to head an investigative and operational group created to investigate this unprecedented case. Truly, the ways of the Lord are mysterious!

How did I become drawn into the orbit of this extraordinary investigation? At the end of July 1995, he retired from the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs. He left, among other reasons, due to his transfer to the investigative department of the Russian Prosecutor General's Office.

In August 1995, he was appointed investigator for particularly important cases.

The head of the investigative department, Mikhail Borisovich Katyshev, introduced me to the investigative and operational group, headed by the investigator for especially important cases, Vladimir Ilyich Startsev.

Shortly before these, Startsev accepted the criminal case of the murder of Listyev, which he received from Boris Ivanovich Uvarov, the senior investigator for particularly important cases.

Initially, Katyshev assigned me one area of ​​work and, after studying the materials provided, drew up and agreed on a detailed plan of investigative and operational actions and began to implement it.

Naturally, he periodically reported to Katyshev and Startsev about the results of his work. Taking into account the data received, the plan was adjusted each time, new activities were planned, both investigative and operational.

On October 24, 1995, a real Doctor of Law, Professor Yuri Ilyich Skuratov, was appointed as the new Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation. At one time, he was one of the youngest doctors of science in the former Soviet Union. For a long time he taught at the Sverdlovsk Law Institute.

Then he worked in the state and legal department of the CPSU Central Committee. After the abolition of Article 6 of the USSR Constitution “on the CPSU as the guiding and guiding force of our society,” Yuri Ilyich was sent to work as a consultant on legal issues to the KGB of the USSR, and subsequently to the Ministry of Security of the Russian Federation. In 1993, Skuratov was appointed director of the Research Institute for Strengthening Law and Order under the General Prosecutor's Office. Member of the board of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation.

Life always gives some signs - obscure at the beginning and very explainable later. The then Chairman of the Federation Council Vladimir Filippovich Petr Georgievich Triboi introduced the newly appointed Prosecutor General to the team | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Shumeiko. This happened in the Marble Hall of the General Prosecutor's Office on Bolshaya Dmitrovka. Our main TV channels reported on this event: ORT, Rossiya, NTV, TVC. In the evening, while watching the news, I saw myself in the hall. I didn't have enough space, so I stood in the aisle near the right wall of the hall. The cameraman, showing the hall, for some reason kept the camera on me for a few seconds. Maybe because he was standing. Could I then have imagined that I would have to work closely with the newly introduced Prosecutor General Yuri Ilyich Skuratov? That in the future things will come to the point where I will interrogate the appointed Prosecutor General himself, and then recognize him as a victim. True, in a different criminal case. I note that he will not be the first Prosecutor General whom I will interrogate. At that unusual time, it so happened that for various reasons Ilyushenko A.N., Stepankov V.G., and then Skuratov Yu.I. were interrogated.

After Skuratov’s arrival, at his suggestion, Yuri Yakovlevich Chaika was appointed First Deputy Prosecutor General, and Mikhail Borisovich Katyshev was appointed Deputy Prosecutor General for Investigation. According to the law, it was Chaika who was the second official of the Prosecutor General’s Office.

Paying tribute to the internal regulations, we, the investigators, nevertheless, considered Katyshev “first after God,” since both in procedural and supervisory terms we focused exclusively on him.

Thus, in connection with the new appointment, Mikhail Borisovich left the investigation department. Vladimir Ivanovich Kazakov, head of the department for investigating banditry and premeditated murders (in everyday life we ​​called the department “gangster”), was appointed its new head.

Like Katyshev, Kazakov was an experienced operational officer, softer in character than Katyshev, but he was also a person devoted to his profession, a demanding and delicate leader. He enjoyed unquestionable authority among the investigators. Friendly and discreet.

It should be noted that the investigation into Listyev’s murder was under all possible controls. The investigative work was heard from Katyshev and Skuratov, the operational work was heard from the top officials of the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

General reports of the investigation and operational work from the Prosecutor General took place with the participation of these leaders. I was told that the Minister of Internal Affairs, Anatoly Sergeevich Kulikov, also participated in such hearings. When I reported, I had to meet the heads of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB: respectively, Sergei Vadimovich Stepashin and Nikolai Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Dmitrievich Kovalev. Sometimes Yuri Yakovlevich Chaika also took part.

The heads of the Main Directorate of Criminal Investigation and the Main Directorate for Combating Organized Crime of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, as well as the operational department of the FSB, were always present. As far as I know, the Prosecutor General, in turn, reported on the progress of the investigation to President Yeltsin. I know about this because from time to time I myself prepared review reports to the General “for reporting to the President.”

The fact is that Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin took Listyev’s murder very seriously. By his decree, the head of the Moscow City Internal Affairs Directorate, Pankratov, and the Moscow Prosecutor, Ponomarev, were immediately removed from their positions.

On March 2, 1995, the President arrived in Ostankino and spoke to Vlad’s colleagues. He said: “I could not help but come to you at this moment. And I bow my head to you as one of the culprits of those leaders who did not take enough measures to combat banditry, corruption, bribery and crime. The murder of Listyev is a tragedy for all of Russia and Moscow has become a place for gangster murders. It is necessary to tighten the fight against such crimes.” Neither before nor later did the President make such an apology.

In October 1996, after the next operational meeting on the case, the Prosecutor General, dissatisfied with the progress of the investigation, entrusted me with further investigation. This was done without any shouting or external irritation. Actually, as I later became convinced, such a manner of behavior was not characteristic of the intelligent Yuri Ilyich.

He calmly said: “I am not satisfied with today's report and the progress of the investigation in general. Therefore, I instruct investigator Triboi to head the investigative team. Petr Georgievich, take the case into proceedings, study it carefully, draw up a new plan of investigative measures. Discuss the plan regarding operational work with the assigned forces of the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Report on the execution, the deadline is ten days.” After this meeting, when we left the office of the Prosecutor General, it seemed to me that Volodya Startsev sighed with some relief. I can’t say that this serious order from the Prosecutor General, in turn, made me happy.

Of course, the change in the head of the investigative team did not speed up the investigation. But in life there are different situations. I guessed it, Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

that hard, exhausting work awaits me. But this circumstance did not frighten me. If we remember that difficult time, the reaction of society and the country's leadership to this shocking murder, then we can say that it was perceived as a kind of challenge thrown criminal world for all of us.

At stake, as never before, extremely acutely, was the question of the professional viability of the then law enforcement agencies and, above all, the investigation and operational services. They had no choice but to accept this challenge and find those who dared to so brazenly disturb public peace.

Accordingly, unraveling the threads of this complex matter meant that we were worth something. Failure put a stain on the professional biography of not only each of us, but also diminished the authority of the law enforcement system as a whole.

After all, a state can only be considered normal when it can protect its citizens and give a worthy rebuff to those who are trying to replace it by carrying out arbitrary reprisals. At least, this is how I saw the picture: an unprecedented case and corresponding responsibility for its fate. Moreover, the burden of responsibility pressed on all sides: from my immediate superiors, from the leaders of my superiors, that is, from the authorities of the country, from Vlad’s relatives and friends, from the deceased’s colleagues - journalists, from ordinary people who were regularly informed about the investigation by the media.

From today's heights, I can say that this investigation took a toll on me like no other. And this despite the fact that all the cases that were investigated over the last twelve years of my career were especially important.

In my further narration I would like to make some clarifications.

Since the crime of Listyev’s murder cannot be called procedurally solved, I will be forced to refer only to facts that, in my opinion, will not harm the investigation. It (the investigation) is still not completed.

So, after the last volumes of the criminal case migrated from Startsev’s safes to mine, I believed that he would still tell me about what lay, as it were, “behind the scenes.” But contrary to my expectations, Volodya did not say anything like that. I just noticed that everything that is there is in the case files. “Read it and you will understand everything,” he said. Frankly speaking, such an ingenuous answer surprised me a little.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

I don’t want to throw a stone at someone else’s garden, and may my predecessors forgive me, but studying the case revealed a bleak picture. I admit this circumstance with sadness, since I do not rule out that I, in turn, missed something, underestimated it. And if someone puts forward some justified claims, I am ready to accept them. But what happened, happened. You can't remove the words from the song.

An investigator from the Moscow Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal case and inspected the scene of the incident. It must be said that the inspection of the scene of the incident was not carried out very thoroughly. Unfortunately, no re-inspection was carried out. As I was later told, after the inspection, the cleaning lady, while washing Vlad’s blood from the floor, found another cartridge case, which was then handed over to the investigation.

Neither the operatives, the investigator or other participants in this most important investigative action, but the cleaning lady found such evidence.

There were other mistakes as well. For example, during the same inspection of the crime scene, a search dog was used. In such cases, the dog handler, upon completion of the search action, draws up a special act with an appended diagram of the search dog’s work route. The dog handler is interrogated about the results and features of her work. Maybe someone thought that these were trifles, but it seems to me that in such matters there are no trifles - everything is important.

Here it is necessary to understand that only the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes are generally binding for all investigators. The rest, how you plan your work and how you carry out what you plan - this, like the structure of handwriting, is different for everyone. One will plan everything in detail - down to the smallest detail: a plan for the investigation of the case as a whole and each investigative action separately. Another may draw up a plan less scrupulously and tries to, as they say, “keep in mind” the details. Although this approach is risky, especially in business matters, something will definitely come up before the end of the investigation.

So, in our case, many points have emerged that should have been clarified a long time ago: either excluded from the investigation, or investigated more thoroughly.

The matter was in a rather “disheveled” state. The materials were filed “haphazardly.” It couldn’t have been any other way when I learned that their systematization in volumes was carried out by an assistant investigator... a 2nd or 3rd year student law institute. For example, on the covers of some Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

of the numbered volumes, one could read the inscription made in pencil - “empty interrogations.” When I asked the guys-investigators who worked in the brigade from the first days why this a large number of so-called “empty interrogations”, this reason was explained to me. During the initial period of investigation, the results of the work for a day, two, three or a week were summed up daily or several times a week. One of critical issues there was a notorious wave: how many people were interrogated per day, “why are there fewer interrogations today than yesterday.” Naturally, one could not expect any important information from such “empty interrogations.” As one of the guys put it, everything went as in the famous saying “Who goes to the forest, who gets firewood”, the main thing is the quantity, the shaft. As I became more familiar with the case materials, I was looking forward to studying the most serious materials of the investigative actions carried out by the leaders of the investigation team.

Imagine my disappointment when, in the end, I found ... two interrogation reports on two leaders. Moreover, one of the protocols drawn up by the student investigator was not signed by the interrogated person at all.

Such moments also surprised me. It is generally accepted that investigative actions with persons who are believed to be able to tell important information: interrogations, confrontations, identifications, and sometimes searches, as a rule, are carried out by the head of the team or an investigator of equal experience, but in no way by an institute student or a young inexperienced investigator.

Even greater disappointment awaited me when I saw that the most important identification of one of the defendants in the case was also carried out by a student investigator. In any case, I would never risk entrusting such an extremely important investigative action to an inexperienced comrade.

As they say, “One head is good, but two are better.” Better yet, a lot of goals. When drawing up a new plan, I decided to use the collective experience of my comrades in the investigation group. To do this, he provided all the materials for study to two more experienced investigators of the group.

They made quite useful additions to the plan I drew up.

I listened to the practical advice and comments of other investigators. As a rule, in the morning the group gathered and discussed who would do what. In the evening, the investigative materials were placed on my table. I studied them, planned new investigative actions if there was a need for such. All this was simultaneously discussed with members of the investigative team.

I never resorted to pressure on investigators, as Peter Georgievich Triboi thought so | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

unacceptable. He encouraged and always welcomed personal initiative. And this could only arise in a normally established working environment, without shouting or irritation. It is well known that the team internally respects the leader who himself is an example in his work. And if you only command and look at your comrades as cogs, then you are unlikely to achieve anything significant.

The new plan, agreed upon with the operational services, was submitted to the Prosecutor General on time. He carefully read the document, made some of his well-founded comments and kept one copy for himself to control.

–  –  –

Someone smart said that “an investigation is a chain of suspicions that require verification. You have to go to many harbors until you find the right port.”

It is known that when investigating any crime, as a rule, the victim, his friends and close comrades are the involuntary allies of the investigator. In the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, adopted in 2001, this circumstance is outlined more clearly: the victim, along with the investigator, prosecutor, inquiry officer, civil plaintiff, is classified as a participant in criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution. Naturally, when receiving materials from Startsev, he inquired about the relationship with Vlad’s recognized injured wife, Albina Vladimirovna Nazimova, and his close comrades.

Volodya told me that there are either no relations at all, or they are bad, unconstructive and even hostile, bordering on opposition to the investigation. And here’s why: Vlad’s friends and Albina herself do not help the investigation; they allow themselves to criticize the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation and its leadership in various media. “In general, they behave strangely,” he said.

This information did not inspire me. But the materials I read suggested that Volodya Startsev was not so far from the truth. What to do, what to do? In such cases they say that “if the mountain does not come to Magomed, then Magomed goes to the mountain.” It was necessary to somehow find contact with them and “talk” them. Now I understand that maybe Pyotr Georgievich Triboi made a tactical mistake | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

error. I had to immediately meet someone close to Vlad, introduce myself, explain the interests of the investigation, and just get to know each other, look each other in the eye. But I could not help but believe my friend, in whose opinion the conversation would not be constructive and no one would make contact with us. It was necessary to find a way out of this critical and unprecedented situation. There was nothing left to do but find out the reasons why Vlad’s relatives, friends and comrades took such a strange position in relation to the investigation.

It took about six months to study these circumstances. Frankly speaking, this was not the most useful work for the business, although it also brought us fruit. After all, if an investigative check was carried out and, although it did not give a positive result, nevertheless, this is also a result - you are convinced that “the dog is not buried here.”

Gradually, already well prepared for interrogations, he began to meet with Vlad’s widow, his friends and close comrades. I can say that almost all of them turned out to be reasonable people. Interrogation is not the most pleasant procedure in a person’s life and, probably, if it could have been avoided, most of us would have done so. Some of the people mentioned above were probably no exception. He interrogated them, as a rule, with the participation of one of the group’s investigators. This was a kind of “training” for investigators in order to entrust them with other serious investigative actions in the future. The interrogated answered questions and did not isolate themselves.

All of them were mostly publicly known people, so the group’s investigators were somewhat embarrassed at first. But the work went well.

To be honest, I did not expect such a turn of events. Once I even asked a famous person, “Why didn’t you talk about this before?” And do you know what he answered me? “And who listened to us attentively, Pyotr Georgievich? Only now we see that you, the investigators, are inclined towards this.” It turns out that the fault that people initially kept to themselves lies with us investigators. Let me tell you that no special efforts or any hitherto unknown techniques were used. These people were interrogated as usual. Naturally, treating you like any other person with tact and respect.

I believe that a good investigator cannot be arrogant. Some people assert themselves by doing this, but this is harmful for the investigation and stupid for the investigator himself.

In my opinion, the investigator must be, first of all, a decent and sincere person. And these, evoking trust and reliability, Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

human qualities, without exaggeration, should be a natural addition to the personality of the investigator. A person who has suffered from a crime must find understanding, sympathy and protection from the investigator.

These people should see the investigator as an impartial person who will do everything in his power to ensure that justice prevails. It is obvious that only by possessing such qualities can an investigator count on people’s reciprocal affection.

As for those who have violated the law, they should see in the investigator an example of compliance with the law. That is, the offender must understand that he is responsible only for those unlawful actions that he actually committed and in no way for imperfect ones. Because something else does not educate, but corrupts people and instills in them disdain not only for the norms of morality and morality, but also for the laws.

For example, I had to receive letters from places of detention.

In them, my former defendants thanked “not for the fact that I brought them to justice, since such a thing, according to them, is not accepted,” but for the humanity and justice shown to them. They wrote that our communication during the investigation allowed them to look at life differently.

And they, having been released from prison, will reconsider a lot and will live differently. I remember that I gave one of these letters from a man convicted of robbing mentally ill patients while they were being transported in an ambulance to a Komsomolskaya Pravda correspondent. Unfortunately, I don’t know what the journalist did with this letter, since no publication was published on this topic.

At the same time, the investigator must have a strong character, able to withstand pressure from any side. Be calm and realistic about the misfortunes you encounter.

At the same time, in his work, the investigator should in no case be a “naive, servile simpleton,” since cunning or inveterate “clients” will immediately notice this feature and will certainly take advantage of it.

I remember an incident from my investigative youth, when a young colleague released a seasoned fraudster for three days, complaining that her arrest coincided with the beginning of her menstrual cycle. So, naturally, she disappeared. True, six months later, tired of hiding, she herself came to the investigator.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

And he took her into custody. With this she taught him good lesson on the topic of who and how to trust during the investigation.

Accordingly, in his work, a professional investigator is obliged to quickly “find the key” to any interrogated person and “get on the same wavelength with him.” At the same time, it is also important to correctly consolidate the procedural results of this work.

When examining Listyev's corpse, several bank credit cards in his name were found in the pockets of his clothes. These cards were issued by banks in the USA, Switzerland and Germany. Appeals for legal assistance were sent to the competent authorities of these countries.

We were interested in questions about on the basis of which accounts in the relevant banks credit cards were issued, what monetary transactions were carried out on them, when and where. What are the balances Money on the accounts, who managed them or is managing them after Vlad’s murder.

Of course, these circumstances should have been clarified at the very beginning of the investigation, and not a year and seven months later. Just like establishing the exact time of the murder. Imagine, the investigative actions we carried out made it possible to clarify the time of the commission of the crime, shifting it by 25 - 30 minutes from what was considered initially established.

It would seem, what did this mean for the investigation? 25 - 30 minutes plus or minus? I believe that these minutes were extremely important.

Think about what kind of alibi a criminal can create for himself by being in a car for 25 to 30 minutes. That is why it was important to establish the time of the murder with maximum accuracy.

How did we clarify the time of the murder? The following circumstances come to mind about this.

The investigation established that F. discovered Listyev’s corpse in the entrance at approximately 21:00 sharp or 21:05. There were no hematomas or bruises on the face. They appeared after some time.

Forensic medical expert N., with twenty-nine years of experience, stated that after a gunshot fracture of both roofs of the orbits with multiple lines, the possible time for hematomas to appear and Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

bruising lasts from 10 to 15 minutes (early stage), and until fully expressed - 30 minutes.

I., who always feeds the child at 21:00, it was at this time that he heard several dull knocks in the entrance, the sounds of impacts on metal boxes on the first floor. Then I heard the stamping of feet and two or three pops, which was the sound of something falling.

V. and S. said that no later than 21:05 they rang the doorbell and asked for help. They went out and saw that Listyev was lying.

Citizen Ts., returning from a walk and passing Listyev’s entrance, looked at his watch. The time was 20 hours 59 minutes. Listyev's car, which he knows, was parked near the first entrance.

Other convincing evidence was received about the time of the murder, which, for obvious reasons, I cannot disclose.

So that no one has any illusions, I can say that the investigation studied Vlad’s life in detail until his last minute.

Moreover, they exhaustively established when, where, with whom, what meetings he had and what specific issues were discussed. That is, we found out in detail everything that could be of interest to us. These circumstances gave a fairly clear outline of the reasons for what happened. You can imagine how the investigators perceived the attempts of some people during interrogations to verbally move away from the date of the murder - March 1, 1995 - their personal meetings with Vlad. And later it became quite clear to us why and for what purpose such attempts were made.

Of course, we were very surprised when, during one of the searches, we discovered a copy of a letter addressed to the management of a Swiss bank from one of Vlad’s associates with a request not to give any information to the investigative authorities of the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office.

I quote from memory with the necessary notes: “...We refer to the petition sent by the Russian authorities...in the case of the murder of Mr. Listyev. We give you full authority to make a statement in order to ensure that information known... and relating to the following persons is not completely disclosed to the Russian authorities. The following are the names of ten people from Listyev’s entourage, seven of whom are very famous people. The document ends like this: “We are not talking about obtaining ... information regarding these individuals (taking into account the positions of Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

some of them) may be perceived as a source for... persecution by interested Russian services. I hope for your understanding and help."

Fortunately, this preventive measure did not help, and we, thanks to the goodwill of our foreign colleagues, received in full the information we were interested in, both from Switzerland, and from the USA and Germany. At that moment there was no reason to believe that credit cards had anything to do with Vlad’s murder.

Many of the people we interrogated were not “ordinary” people and, at times, it was difficult to negotiate with them about the need to appear for interrogation. One day I called the deputy director of the FSK (now the FSB) and at the same time the head of the FSK (FSB) department for Moscow and the Moscow region, Colonel General Anatoly Vasilyevich Trofimov. He introduced himself and said that it was necessary to meet and interrogate him.

The word “interrogation” blew up Anatoly Vasilyevich and he asked me if I knew who he was. He answered that I am not an alien and, of course, I know what position he occupies, and I honor and respect this circumstance. Then Anatoly Vasilyevich asked if he could come to his office for interrogation. He said that this issue is not very important for me, but since the testimony will be recorded on a computer, I still ask him to treat my request with understanding. When Anatoly Vasilyevich said that he also worked as an investigator, I “took him, as they say, at his word,” noting, “Can’t two investigators agree on an interrogation?”

He softened a little, warmed up and offered to tell us the time of appearance and address.

He showed up at the appointed time and answered my questions. As he was leaving, Anatoly Vasilyevich said that at first he “got excited,” but this must be forgotten.

In turn, he thanked him for “fulfilling his civic duty.” Anatoly Vasilyevich smiled and left.

Relations with the media It is clear that the investigation into this murder was constantly under the close attention of the media, and therefore the public. We were often criticized and sometimes rightly so.

Journalists, friends and comrades of Vlad made various claims against the investigation and the prosecutor's office. But the prosecutor's office either remained silent, or Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

meaningfully but unconvincingly reported on the progress of the investigation with hints such as “there is light at the end of the tunnel.”

Not a single publication in the media or broadcast on television that in one way or another touched on Listyev’s murder passed by the attention of the investigative team. I will say this, basically, these publications did not provide any benefit to the investigation; on the contrary, they distracted us, investigators, from working in real areas. As it turned out, ordered publications appeared more than once with the aim of misleading the investigation. But we could not ignore them, since we read newspapers or watched TV and those to whom each of us, at our own level, reported on the investigation. Moreover, questions arose about them from both the Prosecutor General and the President of the country.

By the way, we also recorded attempts by our opponents to control the progress of the investigation. Moreover, informants sometimes came from other cities with reports.

We understood that we had watched TV programs and read publications, and then they were discussed, including by “people” whose opinion about Listyev’s murder we were extremely interested in. And it would be stupid not to take advantage of these circumstances. This is also why there was operational support for the investigation.

Sometimes tragic accidents followed public awareness. Or not an accident. It all depends on how you look at it.

For example, on August 10, 1995, Deputy Prosecutor General Oleg Ivanovich Gaidanov gave an interview to one printed publication, in which he stated: the perpetrators are already known. Literally the next day, in one of the hotels in Tel Aviv, the body of a man was found who was of significant interest to the investigation. I believe this tragic coincidence is not accidental.

With the approval of my managers, we decided to change the order of relations with the media. We proceeded from the fact that a famous journalist was killed and it is clear that this murder attracted enormous attention from his colleagues, and from society as a whole. Therefore, people have the right to know, within the limits of what is permitted, without prejudice to work, how the investigation is progressing. Moreover, we, the investigators, did not sit idly by, but continued to work hard, and we had something to say.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

After a meeting with Igor Korolkov, a columnist for the Izvestia newspaper specializing in investigative journalism, my first interview was published in the issue dated February 27, 1998, entitled by the author “This is not a political murder” with the subtitle “The investigation into the Listyev case has entered the stage when the head the investigation team is being threatened."

He talked about what we are doing, what progress is being made in the matter, what problems and complaints we, in turn, have. Naturally, I tried to answer the questions without harming the ongoing investigation, since we knew that among the readers there would be those whom we were looking for.

I believed that it was better to tell me what was possible than to remain silent and give a reason Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

for all sorts of rumors and fables. After all, it was believed that “if they are silent and swallow,” it means that the situation is completely bad—the investigation has nothing to say. In fact, this was not the case at all.

I gave an interview for one more reason, which only operational workers should guess.

After this publication, many journalists began to contact me, bypassing the public relations center of the Prosecutor General’s Office. Often, if it was possible to answer their questions, I would. I remember how a journalist from a popular publication told me: “Petr Georgievich, if you don’t want to answer my question, then I will still write and fulfill the editorial assignment. But, I’ll write from myself - whatever comes to mind.” I said that I would always answer her questions that I could answer. Another thing is that, for objective reasons, I cannot answer all questions, even if I know the answers. There are interests and the secret of the investigation, and they are above all. Your colleague was killed, don’t you want the attackers to answer for this?

Gradually, the flow of criticism against the investigative team and the Prosecutor General's Office began to subside. This was facilitated by the fact that Prosecutor General Skuratov himself was also open to journalists and often himself commented on this or that circumstance in the case. Sometimes afterwards he would ask me assertively: “I didn’t reveal anything, did I?” Give me a hint if anything."

Interrogations of Berezovsky B.A. and his “help” to the investigation

It so happened that the interrogations of Boris Abramovich Berezovsky occupied a special place in the investigation. By this time he was already in the rank of Deputy Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation. As I remember, this was not his first interrogation in the Listyev case. After I invited him for questioning by phone, Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Katyshev called me and clarified this circumstance.

Subsequently, Mikhail Borisovich said that Boris Abramovich called him and said that he was “summoned for questioning in the Listyev case by investigator Triboi.” Katyshev answered him: “Go, Boris Abramovich, don’t be afraid, Triboi won’t beat you, he’s a polite person, but he knows his business.”

In response, Boris Abramovich remarked to him: “You are always joking, Mikhail Borisovich.” After interrogation during a telephone conversation or during a random conversation, Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

At the meeting, Boris Abramovich remarked to Katyshev that “the investigator is really correct, but not simple.” In a word, he made it clear that it was difficult for him during this interrogation.

We must pay tribute to Boris Abramovich or his advisers; despite his position as a “big boss,” he never shied away from calling the investigator, did not create artificial obstacles to appearance, and treated this with understanding. When I called him, he only asked “when and what time should I show up?” It seemed as if Boris Abramovich had been interrogated all his life, and this procedure had become familiar to him. At the same time, such an understanding of him involuntarily aroused the respect of the investigation.

I remember one day he was slightly late for the agreed time.

And then Boris Abramovich called me, apologized, said that he was in the office of the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, Anatoly Sergeevich Kulikov, and as soon as he was free, he would immediately come for interrogation. I did not check whether he was actually with A.S. Kulikov.

And then, and later, I asked myself why Berezovsky, unlike other people of such “large caliber,” came to the investigator so without conflict. And why did he treat calls for interrogation with such reverence?

I find the following possible explanations for this:

First, perhaps Boris Abramovich developed such a normal response to our calls after the procedural actions that were carried out against him in connection with the explosion of his car in 1994.

One of his colleagues said that in that case, at first Boris Abramovich “strongly resisted all interrogations” and “creaked” when he came to the investigators.

Apparently, he had some experience with interrogations.

Secondly, Boris Abramovich, as a person who claims to have liberal views, probably watched “local” (Western) films in which interrogations of high-ranking officials, including heads of state and government, are not a problem for law enforcement agencies.

Third, he was a fresh, not stagnant boss and, probably, as a leader he did not have time to become worn out. That is, by position he was already Deputy Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, but by his mentality he still remained the head of the laboratory.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Fourth – Boris Abramovich, no matter what they say about him, you cannot deny that he was smart person. And why did he have to quarrel with the investigator?

I can’t say that during interrogation Boris Abramovich behaved as if he were in confession. Outwardly he was calm and even cold-blooded. Nothing in his behavior betrayed any excitement in him. On the contrary, it seemed to me that he was anticipating with interest the questions that would follow.

He, in my opinion, perceived them as a kind of competitive challenge.

He spoke quickly, as always, and sometimes did not have time to grasp the meaning of what was said.

I had to repeat questions and clarify his answers. And I must say that some of Boris Abramovich’s answers were striking. It was something out of science fiction. They “left no stone unturned” and shattered to smithereens the opinion that Boris Abramovich can think logically.

But in such cases, apparently, he agreed to be suspected of “what brings the blizzard” rather than answer the question truthfully, since the price of each word was extremely high. Such “strange” answers of his followed when it was necessary to speak specifically, unambiguously and without philosophizing. Well, tell me, Reader, why did Boris Abramovich need to deny obvious facts and, thereby, cast doubt on the reliability of all his testimony? This made about the same impression as if, during interrogation, he, presenting his documents addressed to Boris Abramovich Berezovsky, began to declare and convince me that he was not Berezovsky, but Ivan Ivanovich Ivanov.

“Boris Abramovich didn’t remember a lot,” although due to the circumstances of the case he should have remembered some facts with one hundred percent probability.

For example, he found out the question of when he last saw Listyev. As I remember, despite the fact that on the eve of Listyev’s murder on the night of February 28 to March 1, 1995, Berezovsky had a long conversation with Vlad in the Logovaz office on Novokuznetskaya Street with the participation of other people, Boris Abramovich replied that he had seen the latter for a week or two before the murder.

He had the same “misses” when answering other questions.

Experiencing another serious difficulty in answering a question, Boris Abramovich referred to Art. 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and said that he would not testify. I noted to him that this is indeed his constitutional right. At the same time, he said that this is excusable for an ordinary person, but for him, with his great regalia, it is hardly justified to refer to Pyotr Georgievich Triboi in this situation | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Constitution of the Russian Federation. The fact is that the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation can familiarize himself with this protocol, and he, in turn, can report “about the game of silence during interrogation” to President B.N. Yeltsin.

As I remember now, Boris Abramovich, after some thought, said:

“Then you’ll have to answer.” And then he irritably asked me a rhetorical question: “Well, what should I answer you, Pyotr Georgievich, to this question of yours?” And he answered. Another thing is how truthful he was about it.

In words, of course, Boris Abramovich presented himself as the most interested person in ensuring that we “identify and bring to justice all the scoundrels involved in the murder of Vlad.” He said that he was ready to provide any possible assistance to the investigation, because in Listyev he personally lost “a very close person.”

In fact, everything happened the other way around. Boris Abramovich was disingenuous, played with us and, as best he could, with his behavior helped precisely those who were of legitimate interest to us. Helping our opponents, Boris Abramovich used his entire powerful arsenal of political, administrative and informal capabilities. Moreover, in attempts to restrain the investigation from the feigned liberalism of Boris Abramovich, only crude and calculating realism remained. Here we, the investigation, had no time for jokes.

It must be said that by 1997, our cunning opponents began to use the fact of failure to solve Listyev’s murder as a “club” with which they periodically attacked the Prosecutor General’s Office.

For them, the solution of the crime itself was of secondary importance; the main thing was the reason - something to cling to publicly. They say that Listyev’s case has not been solved, and they still have the audacity to pester us (the good ones) with some demands. To achieve this, our “friends” did not disdain anything.

The situation with this and other “high-profile” criminal cases was deliberately transferred to the political plane. The information was dissected as if the Prosecutor General's Office was a center of communists and retrogrades who were preventing advanced reformers from carrying out successful political and economic reforms in the country. It must be said that at times they managed to provoke a negative reaction from the President of the country.

Remember the famous beating that President B.N. Yeltsin staged live on air in the spring of 1998. To the Prosecutor General Yu.I. Skuratov: “There is no discipline in the prosecutor’s office, it is not led by Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

The Prosecutor General, but from the outside. The killers of Me, Kholodov, and Listyev have not been found.”

For me and my colleagues, it is not a big mystery who could have set the President up for a conversation in such a tone with the Prosecutor General throughout the country.

On the same day, after this meeting with the President, the Prosecutor General summoned me. I told my comrades, who also saw everything on TV, that the Prosecutor General was calling me. We thought that trouble awaited us and that I would most likely be removed from further investigation.

On the way from Blagoveshchensky Lane (our office) to Bolshaya Dmitrovka Street (office of the Prosecutor General's Office), to be honest, my soul was tormented by regrets that much had been done and there was not enough time to put everything in its place.

On the other hand, I thought, well, to hell with it (unaddressed), what can I do, they’ll suspend me - at least I’ll get some decent sleep first. They will give you another case - less “loud” and with a more defined perspective. I’ll breathe more freely, since this matter has exhausted me.

Arriving at Yuri Ilyich Skuratov’s office and greeting him, I noticed that he was focused on something, but was not angry at all.

The General, as always correct, clarified some details of the investigation, but did not verbally make any claims to me. I thought that he was not doing this out of delicacy. Then, in order to “make his task easier,” he said that he saw on TV how his meeting with the President went, and, in connection with the claims made against us, he was ready to write a report on his resignation.

Yuri Ilyich, interrupting me, said that his answer to the President was not shown on TV. He regarded the President’s remarks as a working moment and told the investigative team to continue working at the same pace.

Boris Abramovich especially disliked one of the key deputies of the Prosecutor General, Katyshev, whom he suspected of having connections with the communists.

Although this was not the case. On the contrary, Katyshev had close relatives who suffered during the years Stalin's repressions. The fact is that to congratulate Katyshev on his 50th birthday in the office among other deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, including Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

including from the Yabloko party, a deputy, a former prosecutor, the late V.I. Ilyukhin also came. And, despite the fact that Katyshev did not have a “special” relationship with this deputy, Boris Abramovich was no longer interested in this, since it did not fit into the outline he had invented - about Katyshev’s communistism.

About the Prosecutor General Yu.I. Skuratov Boris Abramovich, in my opinion, expressed himself even harsher and ruder in Kommersant, saying that “this is a completely communist brute.” I also cannot agree with Berezovsky. During all the time I worked under Skuratov’s leadership, I never heard from anyone that he gave instructions in any criminal case “to make concessions or some exceptions for communists.”

Sometimes Boris Abramovich’s “help” in the Listyev case took on the character of outright mockery and contempt for the investigation.

By 1997, he had gained significant control of the ORT (Russian Public Television) channel. The duties of the General Director were performed by K.Yu. Ponomareva, who was considered a person close to Berezovsky.

I remember that I sent a request to Ksenia Yuryevna asking her to tell me when and by whom the decision to cancel advertising on ORT was announced in 1995. According to our data, Listyev did this shortly before the murder. I asked to send the investigation a video recording of Vlad’s speech on the cancellation of advertising and documents on his appointment as General Director of ORT and the decision itself to cancel advertising on paper. It would seem like a simple, non-threatening request, why not answer it. Moreover, for Ponomareva, the request was about a crime that took the life of her predecessor, who, moreover, was a “close person” to Berezovsky.

But it was not there. I sought an answer to my request for about six months and received it after repeated reminders. To be honest, in connection with such an ugly attitude towards a legitimate request, sometimes the thought occurred to me whether I should issue a decree to conduct a search at ORT. But I didn’t want a scandal with unpredictable consequences.

As a result, one day a paper package was delivered by courier from the legal department of ORT, which contained a video cassette without a covering letter. When watching this tape, Listyev’s performance that interested me was not there. The tape contained a video recording of Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

one speech by the leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation G.A. Zyuganov and one broadcast of the “Man and the Law” program. I understand that this was such a subtle mocking “hello” from Boris Abramovich, since it is unlikely that Ponomareva herself would have come up with such a trick.

When he succeeded, Boris Abramovich himself dealt direct blows to the prosecutor’s office and the investigation into Vlad’s case, respectively.

On March 25, 1998, the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper published a full-page interview with Berezovsky, which he gave to journalist Andrei Vandenko. It is no coincidence that the subtitle at the bottom was typed in large bold letters: “The prosecutor’s office demonstrates complete, total powerlessness in the investigation of the Listyev case.” Naturally, the interview also touched on the topic of investigating the criminal case of Listyev’s murder.

And this is what Boris Abramovich answered. I quote:

Correspondent: “Why did I ask about health? After your rapid departure abroad, a version arose that such haste was provoked by a subpoena handed to you summoning you for questioning in the Listyev case.

Berezovsky - I can’t say that such an assumption is offensive to me - I understand who spread this lie and for what purpose, however, I decided to draw conclusions from what happened; I will not leave something like this without consequences.

Correspondent: So?

Berezovsky: “I have the most serious complaints against law enforcement agencies. They do not confirm the disinformation being spread, but they do not refute it either. The prosecutor's office demonstrates complete, total powerlessness in the investigation of Vlad's case, while some of the materials I handed over, which could point to specific criminals, are simply ignored. I emphasize that this is not about my assumptions, but about facts, cassettes with audio and video recordings. I also named the names of people who continued to work in the authorities, engaged in blackmail and received money for it.”

Correspondent: “Were you blackmailed?”

Berezovsky: “Exactly. Alas, all my statements fall on deaf ears.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Correspondent: “Do you have your own opinion about who is guilty of Listyev’s death?”

Berezovsky: “I had suspicions for a long time, they were vague before, but now they have become stronger. I am inclined to believe that the murder of March 1, 1995 is on the conscience of the Russian special services. I repeat, I cannot say this categorically, but everything indicates that my assumption is correct.”

Correspondent: “Special service workers could have been executors of someone else’s orders, but it is unlikely that they ordered the murder.”

Berezovsky: “I’m not talking about the perpetrators, but specifically about the organizers of the crime.”

Correspondent: “And what is the motivation?”

Berezovsky: “Everything is extremely simple – the desire to bring ORT under control.

I have facts that support this version.”

–  –  –

Berezovsky: “I don’t want to name names today - I’m pointing out the direction. But since the name was mentioned, I can say that I know first-hand something about the activities of the gentleman you mentioned. I retrospectively analyzed individual statements by Korzhakov made in my presence, and came to the conclusion that, say, in the case of the assassination attempt on Boris Fedorov, the president of the National Sports Foundation, it could not have happened without the participation of Korzhakov and Barsukov. This is their job. I believe that Otari Kvantrishvili lost his life after the sentence to shoot him was approved by Korzhakov and his comrades. And the pogrom in the apartment of journalist Minkin probably had the same authorship.”

Correspondent: “But we are talking about Vlad.”

Berezovsky: “Actually, I said everything. The hand of the special services is clearly visible in the materials I transmitted.”

Berezovsky: “I did not and do not believe in the family trace. The advertising version also does not seem to me to be consistent. They tried too hard to impose it.

In such matters it is ridiculous to rely on intuition, but in this case neither on Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

that I can’t rely on anything else, and my intuition tells me that Sergei Lisovsky is not involved in this case. I have known him for a long time and well; we once occupied opposing positions and played in the same clearing. This is a tough businessman, but there has never been a time when Sergei went beyond the limits of even decency, not to mention what they are trying to accuse him of today while carrying out, as far as I know, certain work.

If we say so, then stopping advertising on ORT in the spring of 1995 was my idea. I set a simple goal - to destroy the advertising market on Channel 1 in order to take my own place there. Yes, my proposal was difficult for Vlad to accept - no one resorted to such methods of entering the market at that time... To be honest, I don’t know whether Vlad had any personal obligations, but as the general director of ORT, he was definitely clean: in firstly, he wouldn’t have time to run up debts, and secondly, everyone knew the situation well and understood that the real levers of controlling the TV channel were not in Vlad’s hands. Therefore, a showdown with Listyev in this context would look very illogical.

Correspondent: “By the way, how did the investigation into the episode with the explosion on Novokuznetskaya Street in the summer of 1994 end, when your bodyguard died and you miraculously survived?”

Berezovsky: “No results, although in my presence Yeltsin gave the command to the then heads of the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs to take this matter under special control. The investigation has stalled, but there are curious circumstances that connect the attempt on my life with the murder of Listyev. It was these facts that I reported to the intelligence services. Since my information is being kept silent, I intend to announce it myself – with names, facts, dates.”

Boris Abramovich distributed “earrings to all sisters” in this interview.

He showed himself to be an informed person, analyzing the options that, in his opinion, the investigation is working on. Of course, we considered all versions that had an objective motivation. But, as far as I remember, after this interview we interrogated him again, so that he would “decipher” for us what he meant when he spoke about the “involvement of the special services” and about the “transferred materials with audio and video recordings.”

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

And, if my memory serves me right, this is roughly what Boris Abramovich answered. When asked about the “involvement of the special services” in Listyev’s murder, he stated that he meant two police officers who, together with a certain Plekhanov, deceived him on February 28, 1995, on the eve of Listyev’s murder, out of one hundred thousand US dollars. These three allegedly promised Boris Abramovich to receive an audio recording in the future that would contain information about the persons who committed the attempt on his life in June 1994. When I asked Boris Abramovich if he understood the difference between police officers and representatives of the intelligence services, he answered in the affirmative.

When asked why he blamed representatives of the special services, while the situation he spoke about in the interview involved police officers, Berezovsky did not find anything to answer. According to him, he handed over to law enforcement officers audio-video recordings recording preliminary conversations and the transfer of money for future information about the attempt on his life in the summer of 1994.

I think that the leitmotif of this biting interview with Berezovsky “about the involvement of the special services” was the situation about “how Boris Abramovich quarreled with Alexander Vasilyevich” (approx. author A.V. Korzhakov). While he headed the Security Service of the President of the Russian Federation, there was peace and peace. When Alexander Vasilyevich’s positions began to shake, showdowns and various accusations began. But at the same time, why not kick the prosecutor’s office and the investigation in the Listyev case, and more harshly.

In December 1998, the investigative team conducted a series of effective searches in the case, and this fact greatly outraged and alarmed not only those being searched, but also Boris Abramovich. We learned that he promised to “fuck” the insidious investigation and the Prosecutor General’s Office in the “Time” program.

At the same time, Boris Abramovich “one hundred percent” threatened for “punishment”

the investigation and its leaders involved their friends named Tanya, “who was on his pipe,” and Valya, “who was nearby.”

Very serious information about the involvement of Boris Abramovich in the process of counteracting the investigation. I don’t think he didn’t understand what kind of confrontation he was involved in and what kind of case he was going to “fight” with law enforcement officers.

Note No. 1: It is likely that by Tanya and Valya, Boris Abramovich meant the Advisor to the President of the Russian Federation on Image Tatyana Borisovna Dyachenko and the Head of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation Valentin Borisovich Yumashev.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

It is quite clear that he got involved in this process in order to somehow “help” those involved in the case and, perhaps, “his own family.” Personally, I could understand Boris Abramovich if he had reliable information about flagrant violations of criminal and criminal procedural law on our part. But such facts simply did not exist. Moreover, he knew our commitment to upholding rather than breaking the law.

At that time, someone would have found a more worthy use for such irrepressible energy. The “Time” program was then broadcast by the country’s main television channel, ORT (Russian Public Television).

Nowadays it is the First Channel of Russian television. And the promise to “fuck us” in this program directly indicated who was the true “owner” of this channel and at the same time a warning demonstration of the “heavy artillery” that he intended to use to fight the investigation. One inevitably comes to the conclusion that at that time the state was partially privatized by Boris Abramovich.

What other thoughts might arise when civil servants - investigators, prosecutors, operatives are going to be “exposed” unfairly on a television channel, the controlling stake of which belonged to the state.

It must be said that our opponents in the fight against the harmful consequence did not limit themselves only to the intention of “teaching us a lesson” in the “Time” program. They came up with a whole system of measures to “courage” the investigation.

Operational workers told me that after the same searches in one apartment, the owner deliberately scattered things and books on the floor, and then invited television journalists to film, to whom he revealed the entire situation for the illegality of the investigation during the search. After one demonstration, it seems on the NTV channel, a report from this apartment, the head of the department, Kazakov, invited me and asked what was happening. I reported to him the operational information I had “about the staging.” Then an Interfax correspondent contacted me. He also explained the situation with the search in this apartment. At the same time, he warned that we would provide evidence that the investigators had nothing to do with the demonstrated disorder in the apartment. Our “well-wishers” understood the seriousness of the investigation’s intentions and no longer showed this far-fetched “lawlessness of the investigation” on TV.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

As for Boris Abramovich, it must be said that his flexible mind forced him, in turn, to also “probe” the investigator. It seemed to me that his idea of ​​us was dominated by the so-called class approach to investigative bodies. That is, he thought in the opposite Bolshevik way.

In my opinion, he saw in almost all of us adherents of the communist regime, ready, without hesitation, to carry out any order “issued from above.” Of course, such a little-revered idea of ​​us had nothing in common with reality.

One day, after some thought, he asked me: “Peter Georgievich, how do you feel about rich people?” And I think that I disappointed him with my answer when I said that I was indifferent to rich people, that is, not at all. I am not a rich person, but I have absolutely no envy of the rich. I am completely satisfied with my profession and I don’t want to change anything in my destiny. Entrepreneurial activity, I noted, is sometimes associated not only with material, but at that time also with life-threatening risks. Entrepreneurs are not guaranteed against so-called “attacks” not only by bandits, but also by sanitary and epidemiological stations, law enforcement officers, firefighters and others, and others. That is, what is there to envy?

They (entrepreneurs) or businessmen still need to be given awards for their persistence in doing business.”

Then Boris Abramovich asked me - and many of my colleagues think the same way as I do about entrepreneurs. I said that we, investigators, did not fall from the moon, we are an ordinary cross-section of society. And among us there are people of different convictions, but since we are de-partisan, we are forbidden to show our political preferences in the service. It seemed to me that this answer somewhat satisfied Boris Abramovich and it was clear from it that he somehow felt more comfortable.

By the way, regarding my “wealth”. At that time, one day the famous journalist Alexander Khinshtein happened to be at my house. Two more of my colleagues were with him. Sasha became curious about how an investigator for especially important cases of the General Prosecutor’s Office lives and opened the door of the built-in closet in the corridor of my one-room apartment. When he saw that 5-6 men’s shirts, two not new suits and my prosecutor’s uniform were hanging there, Khinshtein, opening his mouth in surprise, said: “I understand why you are so reckless internally.”

As the course of life has shown, Berezovsky B.A. he had his own secrets about Listyev’s murder, and he carefully hid them.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

In January 2016, Sir Robert Owen's report into the death of Alexander Litvinenko was published online. The new information contained in paragraphs No. 3.28 and 3.29 of Sir Owen’s report is extremely interesting and important for my story. It partially clarifies the reason why Berezovsky B.A. “fought” with us and threatened to use his “weighty artillery” from the then Administration of the President of the Russian Federation.

I quote paragraph 3.28: “Another important event in the development of relations between them (meaning Berezovsky and Litvinenko) was the murder of a man named Vlad Listyev in March 1995. Listyev at that time was a popular TV presenter in Russia and headed the independent TV channel ORT, which was controlled by Berezovsky. Marina Litvinenko outlined the circumstances of this episode as follows.

The police entered Berezovsky's office with the aim of arresting him on charges of murdering Listyev. Berezovsky reported this to Litvinenko, who arrived at the office and prevented the police from detaining Berezovsky. She said that both Berezovsky and Litvinenko feared that if Berezovsky was arrested, they might be killed while he was in custody. Talking about those events, Berezovsky said that Litvinenko took out a weapon and turned to the police: “If you try to take it, I will kill you...”.

Sir Robert Owen stated paragraph 3.29 of the report as follows: “I certainly do not have the opportunity to establish the circumstances of that case and determine who is right and wrong, nor to decide whether Berezovsky was in any way involved in the murder of Listyev (this question, as far as I can tell, known, is still controversial).

Moreover, the resolution of such issues is not within the scope of this Investigation. What I can say, and which certainly suits current purposes, is that this episode marked a new stage in the development of friendly relations between Litvinenko and Berezovsky. Moreover, Berezovsky found himself indebted to Litvinenko.

As Marina Litvinenko stated during oral testimony: “After all, Boris Berezovsky has said more than once that Sasha saved his life, for which he is very grateful.” The payment of this debt is an important context for Litvinenko's subsequent flight from Russia to the UK and his life here."

Here is the time to say the famous saying: “Plato is my friend, but the truth is dearer.”

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Firstly, I remember that in the criminal case of the murder of Vladislav Listyev there was information that one of my predecessors tried to arrest B.A. Berezovsky. on charges of murdering Listyev, there was no.

Consequently, this conclusion of Sir Robert Owen is made on the basis of unreliable facts.

But other thoughts arise after Sir Robert Owen stated that “Litvinenko’s intervention and protection of Berezovsky’s office from search marked a new stage in the development of friendly relations between them.”

At one time, a journalist, now a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, Alexander Khinshtein, published an article on June 20, 2006 entitled “The Secret of “Atoll”, Part I Berezovsky’s Secret Archive Has Spoke...”. And this is what he writes about Berezovsky and his Logovaz office on Novokuznetskaya Street.

“Berezovsky collected dirt on everyone: both enemies and friends, because by definition there are no friends in politics. The tapes that came to me recorded conversations between Chernomyrdin, Rybkin, Dyachenko, Yumashev, Naina Yeltsina, Lebed, Abramovich, and so on and so forth.

We developed almost the entire elite,” Sergei Sokolov, the creator and long-time leader of Atoll, admits today. - Boris did not make an exception for anyone. He ordered to control even his closest friends - just in case they suddenly quarreled in the future, so that later he would always be able to blackmail them. This also applied to Dyachenko and Yumashev...

Since 1995, we began to record all conversations in the LogoVAZ Reception House around the clock. The mansion on Novokuznetskaya was then the epicenter of political life. A lot of people came to Berezovsky every day, the whole color, starting from Chernomyrdin and Tatyana Borisovna (Dyachenko - A.Kh.) and ending with half of the Duma.

The premises were also monitored. In the hall where most of the meetings and get-togethers took place, there was a mantel clock equipped with a hidden camera. We made them ourselves, like all other devices. The recording was started from a pocket keychain.

And in Borin’s office we mounted the equipment into a table lamp. When he turned on the light, the video and audio recording began. Plus, there were also portable devices. Other table clocks, writing instruments, Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

huge calculator. If he needed to record someone, he brought them with him...

From these recordings made in the reception house, one can trace the entire modern history of Russia, the most striking, epoch-making events.”

And here's what I think. I have no reason to doubt the reliability of this publication. She explains why Berezovsky so zealously defended his office from being searched and brought in an armed Litvinenko to do this. It turns out that if a search had been carried out, a possible recording of Listyev’s conversation with Berezovsky on the night of February 28 to March 1, 1995, the eve of the murder, could have been discovered and seized. Why was Boris Abramovich so afraid and why did he compare Litvinenko’s help in protecting his office from a search with the fact that he “saved his life.” Is it because perhaps he helped “bury the secret”

the murder of Listyev, about which very serious and unpleasant questions could arise for Boris Abramovich?!

By the way, I remember that Volodya Startsev told me that at the beginning of the investigation, Alexander Litvinenko tried to develop his activity in the field of “solving Listyev’s murder,” but as a person close to Berezovsky, in order to avoid gossip and leakage of information in access to the case was refused.

In general, speaking about these “tricks” of Boris Abramovich, I want to note that I did not feel any hostility towards him. I proceeded from the fact that, as Hegel wrote, “The mole of history, (and in our case, the mole of consequence, author’s note) digs slowly, but digs well.” He probably chose to fight us as his way of protecting himself. Well, he had the right to do so. Rather, I treated him as a kind of collective image of Joseph Fouché of our then realities.

This is how Stefan Zweig describes the latter in his novel Joseph Fouché. “Joseph Fouché, one of the most powerful men of his time, one of the most remarkable people of all times, was not loved by his contemporaries, and his descendants judged him even less. Napoleon on the Island of St. Helena, Robespierre, turning to the Jacobins, Carnot, Barras, Talleyrand (*1) in their memoirs, all French historians - be they royalists, republicans or Bonapartists - barely reaching his name, began to write with bile.

A traitor by nature, a pathetic intriguer, a groveling flatterer, a professional defector, a vile police soul, a despicable, immoral person - there is no such stigmatizing, such an abusive word, Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

by which they would bypass him; neither Lamartine, nor Michelet, nor Louis Blanc (*2) makes a serious attempt to study his character, or rather, his stubborn, astonishing lack of character.

The true outlines of his appearance appear for the first time in the monumental biography of Louis Madeleine (*3) (to which this work, as well as other studies devoted to this issue, owe most of the factual material); history quite calmly relegated this man to the back ranks of insignificant extras, who led all parties during the era of the change of two worlds and turned out to be the only one among the politicians who survived the storms of those years, the man who defeated such people as Napoleon and Robespierre in a psychological duel.

Sometimes his image appears in a play or operetta dedicated to Napoleon, but in most cases he appears there in a well-worn, schematic mask of a hardened police minister, a kind of forerunner of Sherlock Holmes: in a flat image, the role of a behind-the-scenes figure always turns into a secondary role.

Only one person, from the height of his own greatness, saw all the unique greatness of this one-of-a-kind figure: it was Balzac.

This great and insightful mind, who saw not only the outer cover of the events of the era, but also always looked behind the scenes, directly recognized Fouche as the most psychologically interesting character of his century.”

So, one day in the evening around June 2007, on my mobile phone a call rang without identifying the caller's number. I answered.

The following conversation took place: “Hello, is this Pyotr Georgievich?” “Yes,” I answered. Then a man with a voice similar to that of Boris Abramovich said: “This is Boris Berezovsky.”

Taken aback by such a surprise, I asked where he got my phone number, to which the interlocutor replied that the world is small and it’s not difficult to find out my phone number. Then he asked what my humble person had done to deserve his attention. He answered me that he would like me to receive him Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

defense in the Savelovsky District Court of Moscow, where consideration of a criminal case on charges of fraud is due to begin soon. At the same time, it was said that the payment of fees for my legal work could be made, including in one of the Western banks. I only have to tell him the amount of the fee in order to conclude an agreement to protect his rights and interests.

I noted to my interlocutor that the offer was certainly tempting, but I could not agree with it, since our previous meetings were not conducive to concluding such a lawyer’s agreement with him.

He said that moral and ethical obstacles arise for me, and I don’t want to justify myself to anyone. There are no legal grounds for prohibiting such an agreement, but, firstly, the matter is noisy, and secondly, after all, we met under other circumstances. In response, the interlocutor only expressed regret - “very sorry, very sorry” and wished me good luck. This is where our conversation ended.

I cannot say whether the interlocutor was actually Boris Abramovich Berezovsky. However, the voice and manner of speaking (“patter”) were very similar. I don’t rule out a prank, because as I later learned from the media, Boris Abramovich forbade his Russian lawyers to participate in this process and his interests were represented by the appointed defender, that is, the public defender.

But such a strange conversation took place and the person next to me heard that the conversation was with a man whom I called Boris Abramovich. And he also assumed that I was talking with Berezovsky. Moreover, when they recently began to remember this conversation, an eyewitness to the conversation remembered that Boris Abramovich also used the word “fraer” in the conversation, but could not explain in what context. Unfortunately, I forgot this detail of the conversation.

Maybe he called my behavior with this word.

I think that if the caller was actually Berezovsky, then, apparently, he had no hostility towards me either.

And further. It is well known that Boris Abramovich was a master at building all kinds of logical chains and combinations to implement his plans. Maybe he was hoping to overcome the troubles that had arisen with the help of my former colleagues?! In any case, that call remained a mystery to me.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

The story of the publication of Forbes magazine (Forbes) On December 30, 1996, the American magazine Forbes published an article entitled “The Most Influential Person in Russia.”

The article was dedicated to Boris Berezovsky, an entrepreneur and big “boss” in Russia. The author of the article is American journalist Paul Klebnikov.

It also touched on the topic of the murder of Vladislav Listyev. In particular, it was fortunetally reported that “when Listyev announced his intention to stop commercial advertising on the ORT channel, entrepreneur Sergei Lisovsky asked for 100 million US dollars in compensation for losses. Listyev found a European company willing to purchase the rights to advertise on ORT. He also asked Boris Berezovsky to act as a transfer agent and transfer 100 million US dollars to Lisovsky. Berezovsky took the cash and deceived Lisovsky. As a result, Listyev was killed.”

On February 18, 1997, in an interview with his own correspondent of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in New York, Andrei Baranov, Forbes magazine editor James Miles stated that one of the main principles of Forbes magazine is the absolute reliability of the information published.

The magazine conducts a scrupulous and multilateral check of every fact, every figure, before “throwing it out” for publication. In this regard, Forbes is probably the most cautious magazine in the world. The article with details about the reasons for Listyev’s murder is no exception, and the editors can confirm all the facts stated in it.

In connection with this publication, a request for legal assistance was sent to the competent authorities of the United States, which included interrogating the persons who collected material about Listyev’s murder, conducting a seizure and sending us the materials that served as the basis for the publication of details about this murder.

Around the end of February - beginning of March 1998, we received a response from the US FBI to our appeal. From this answer it followed that the author of the publication, Pavel Klebnikov, did not want to place any materials at the disposal of the competent authorities or disclose his sources, citing a possible threat to their personal safety.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

At the same time, Mr. Klebnikov agreed to discuss the questions that investigators from the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office had in connection with the information contained in his article, provided that a special agent of the US FBI would take part in the interview.

After a phone call, as I understand it, from New York, on March 12, 1998, the author of the article, Paul or Pavel Khlebnikov, came to see me. Frankly speaking, I was really looking forward to this meeting, probably more than Khlebnikov himself. Unfortunately, I hoped that he would bring the materials on the basis of which the article was written, and the finish line in the investigation would open for our investigative team. But, as you know, there are no easy paths in the life of investigators.

As I remember, he did not put forward any conditions regarding anyone else’s presence during the interview. We talked for a long time. I didn't rush him.

The conversation took place in a correct, friendly atmosphere. I kept waiting for him to start giving me evidence. But this did not happen, and then he asked Pavel if he had factual materials for the conclusions that were set out in his article. Pavel told me that the information he published is contained in!!! - my criminal case and he received it from some participants in the investigation of the case.

I noted to Pavel that, as the head of the investigative and operational group, I know the contents of the materials of investigative actions and operational search activities, but I don’t remember any of the data he published.

Then Pavel simply got carried away into some kind of wilds. He told me that Listyev’s murder is connected with politics and as soon as the high-ranking culprits are identified, the investigative authorities, that is, us, will not be allowed to bring them to justice. Pavlou said that if he is hinting at Boris Berezovsky, then if such evidence of his guilt is discovered, I do not see any obstacles to raising the question of his arrest. But only if there is evidence! I have full support from the Prosecutor General and his deputy for investigation and, I hope, no one will create any obstacles in this.

Ultimately, I formed the opinion that Khlebnikov did not have any materials that would help our investigation. And, if he has anything, then it is guesses and assumptions, his own or the imaginary participants in the investigation of Listyev’s murder, whom he refused to name.

This, among other things, was reported to Prosecutor General Skuratov. At the same time, I want Petr Georgievich Triboy | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

to emphasize that we said goodbye to him in an amicable way, smiling, without any hint of internal rejection. I thanked Pavel Khlebnikov for the meeting. It never occurred to me that he really didn’t like the meeting.

This is how the journalist Khlebnikov himself describes our meeting in his book entitled “The Godfather of the Kremlin - Boris Berezovsky, or the History of the Plunder of Russia.” “One evening at the beginning of 1999 (Author’s note - the meeting actually took place in 1998, not 1999) I met with Petr Triboi, an investigator for particularly important cases at the General Prosecutor’s Office. He led the investigation into the murder of Listyev, which had been dragging on for four years. The office was gloomy and quiet, as if in a grave. Triboi, with the pale face of a bureaucrat and a gray Soviet-era suit, admitted that the investigation had stalled. None of the lines of inquiry led anywhere;

They checked everything, and all to no avail. It seemed that Triboi had accepted defeat. Another thing was also alarming: apparently, he did not fully understand the key circumstances of the case, especially the nuances of the advertising business on ORT, which, according to the majority, was the reason for Listyev’s murder.”

I deeply regret that Pavel Klebnikov is no longer alive, but these statements of his do not correspond to reality. He did not accept any defeat at that time and did not tell him that “the investigation had reached a dead end.” But I won’t comment on the negative description of my office and my appearance.

It is clear that Pavel Khlebnikov was inclined to a rather free and emotional interpretation of events and facts. In fact, he dedicated a more angry and derogatory fragment to me. But the publishers of his book, who happened to know me, remarked to Pavel that people who knew me simply would not believe what he wrote about me. And then Paul left in his book only the above passage.

Well, each of us has the right to express our opinion.

I would like for a person’s opinion to be based on actual facts, and not on misconceptions and mistakes.

I should note that, due to the circumstances outlined in this publication of Forbes magazine, Boris Berezovsky was once again interrogated as a witness. In his testimony, he completely rejected the allegations contained in the Forbes article. He stated that he had filed a claim for protection of honor and dignity in a London court.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

By the way, as it later became known from the media, Berezovsky managed to convince the court that in the magazine publication he was unfoundedly accused of being behind the murder of Vladislav Listyev. Regarding other claims, a settlement agreement was concluded with the defendant, Forbes magazine, in 2003.

On February 2, 1999, at the request of the editor-in-chief of Komsomolskaya Pravda, Vladimir Mamontov, I gave this newspaper a long interview dedicated to the investigation into Listyev’s murder. The editors published a publication under the loud title “Skuratov’s resignation is an end to the “case”

Listyeva"?

In principle, the editors hit the mark with the title of the interview, since I no longer felt any support from Skuratov’s successor. In addition, Katyshev was transferred to another area of ​​work not related to supervision of the investigation. “Supervise the cleaning ladies,” as the wits joked. And what could I do in those conditions? I couldn’t puff out my cheeks and pretend that nothing had happened. I began to understand that I was “reaching a dead end” and, unfortunately, the investigation would follow me there. The support that was already needed was no longer available.

In my answers, I also gave my critical assessment of Pavel Khlebnikov’s publications in Forbes magazine. I don’t know if this is true, but “evil tongues”

they said that Boris Abramovich seemed to have used this interview of mine in the London court.

They also asked me a question about how I assessed the resignation of my boss Skuratov. He answered, and I quote: “My colleagues and I deeply regret this resignation. I know what kind of pressure he experienced from certain forces who were trying to influence the investigation. He had the courage and diplomatic tact to defend the independence of the prosecutor's office.

Objectively, Skuratov’s resignation is beneficial to those powerful figures who Lately found themselves under close attention of law enforcement agencies and are suspected of corruption. While defending the interests of people and the state, he himself found himself unprotected. “I hope that the Federation Council, when discussing Yuri Ilyich’s resignation, will not be drawn into “politics” and that the governors will have enough determination and independence not to follow the lead of those interested in his resignation.”

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

The role of Prosecutor General Skuratov in the investigation Now I would like to briefly say about the role of Prosecutor General Skuratov in this investigation. I once read that there were several reasons why Skuratov’s neck was “broken” and released from his post. And one of the reasons is the investigation into Listyev’s murder. The question may arise, what does the Prosecutor General have to do with it, did he investigate the case himself?

Investigators subordinate to him investigated, not he. But I assess the role of the Prosecutor General in this investigation as extremely important and most useful. And that's why.

The further we moved with the investigation, the more Yuri Ilyich became involved in its progress. He personally became acquainted with the materials of the investigative actions and with the results of operational search activities. He discussed with us and was aware of almost all of our intentions, as they say, “online.” With his meetings and calls to the heads of law enforcement agencies, he sometimes duplicated our written instructions about this or that operational activity and enhanced their significance.

It must be said that during his reports “he grasped everything on the fly” and had a phenomenal memory. Once, during the next report on the case, I told him about an insignificant situation (not extremely important for the case). Imagine my amazement when three months later he remembered this and asked how “that problem” ended. I thought to myself, he is the Prosecutor General, how can he remember such an insignificant moment?

Once, after the next report, Yuri Ilyich, in the presence of other colleagues, joked: “Petr Georgievich, if you solve Listyev’s murder, I will order that a bust be placed near the fountain in the courtyard of the prosecutor’s office on Bolshaya Dmitrovka and I will order that glasses be sculpted.” I don’t know why, but my response was also a joke: “Yes, Yuri Ilyich will be a monument to us, only, it seems to me, it will be made of dirt.” Unfortunately, my joke turned out to be prescient.

I still remember this feature of that time. How the Prosecutor General positioned himself in the then system of “checks and balances.” Somehow questions arose for the Head of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, Yumashev.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Of course, " big man“And, in my opinion, it was necessary to act through the Prosecutor General. Moreover, the situation was such that it could be clarified either by interrogating Yumashev, or by sending a request to him. And he addressed this problem to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

After listening to me, Yuri Ilyich noted that this was not his level of permission and I should decide for myself what I consider appropriate: either an interrogation or a request. I settled on the second option. There was no desire to tickle my nerves again.

Somewhere in December 1998, Yuri Ilyich invited me to his place, asked about the progress of the investigation, about the problems, and then gave me instructions to prepare him a detailed report laying out the evidence for each of the defendants in the case. Such a certificate was prepared and submitted to the Prosecutor General.

A few days later, at the next meeting, Yuri Ilyich said that he had met with Tatyana Borisovna Dyachenko and Valentin Borisovich Yumashev. The purpose of this meeting is to warn them against further contacts with those involved in our case. In the event of a possible arrest of the latter, this could involuntarily cast a shadow on the President’s family. As he said, Tatyana Borisovna listened to him absentmindedly and nodded her head, as if as a sign of understanding.

Meanwhile, judging by the continued behavior of the people we were interested in, it became clear that no understanding of Yuri Ilyich’s warning was found. On the contrary, as he said later, it became obvious to him that our “clients” have a powerful “roof” and this should be taken into account.

But what choice did I have, as an investigator, under such circumstances?

There was no choice. I continued my work with this joyless knowledge. In my situation, after death threats over the phone, a night-time arson of the door at my place of residence, various kinds of trouble could continue to await me. One more or less – it didn’t change anything radically. I understood that I still had to bear and bear this cross.

In fact, I couldn’t come with a complaint to Skuratov or Katyshev, telling them, you know, it’s hard for me or I’m afraid, give me an easier matter.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

I won’t hide the fact that we were testing in terms of the sufficiency of evidence to take into custody several more defendants in the case.

At the same time, they “kept in mind” the Prosecutor General’s remark about their powerful “roof.”

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

And then I thought, and today I confirm, that the presence of a “roof” ranked second in terms of negative costs that would arise in the event of a possible arrest of suspects.

I would like to say, regardless of Listyev’s case, that I have always been quite “economical” about the use of arrests as a preventive measure. As a rule, if it was possible to leave the ward under recognizance not to leave the place, then he chose the recognizance. Firstly, in such a situation a person could count on a punishment not related to imprisonment. As you know, prison is not the best a good place to educate people. Secondly, arrests not only increase the degree of responsibility of the investigator, but also create unnecessary inconvenience for him.

For example, you will never be able to call a suspect or accused by telephone or by summons. You have to drag yourself to the pre-trial detention center, stand in line and wait until they deliver it to you. Of course, in the case under investigation these rules were difficult to apply.

At the same time, in the first place I still raised the question of the sufficiency of evidence in order to bring forward the appropriate accusation.

In order to more accurately imagine the situation, it is necessary to move the time back 18 years.

Professionals will understand very well what I’m talking about; the courts were different then.

They might not necessarily agree with the investigation.

Believe me, I know very well what I’m talking about, already as a Moscow lawyer with fourteen years of experience. Now, imagine what would happen if, after the arrest, the court did not extend the period of detention of our clients. I will say that an irreparable blow would have been dealt to the future prospects of the case. This time. Secondly, the defendants found out who they are and what complaints they have.

Some smart guy will say, it means you didn’t have evidence, that’s why you were afraid to raise the question of arrest. No, that's not true. With such “friends” among our clients, their financial and informal capabilities, we needed not just evidence, but super evidence. And in those conditions, this could not necessarily guarantee success.

Well, one last thing. Who knew that Skuratov would soon be removed? How happy our “friends” and their entourage were when they learned about Skuratov’s removal and Katyshev’s transfer from supervision of the Department for Investigation of Particularly Important Cases! Words cannot express their emotions.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Of course, the dismissal of Yuri Ilyich from the prosecutor's office was for the case, approximately the same thing that happens to a ship left without a rudder and sails. This expression from Lermontov's poem "Demon" means an event or phenomenon that has neither a clear direction of movement (development) nor control of this movement. That is, we have thoroughly stood up.

“Skuratov’s principled position and his daily help allowed us to overcome numerous obstacles that the investigation faced, including threats of physical violence.”

Now I began to understand that we should not expect any help in the course of further investigation from the future chief head of the department. And I was especially convinced of this when, in the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper dated September 16, 1999, I read the publication, again by Alexander Khinshtein, entitled “He will be loyal” with the subtitle “This is how oligarchs talk about the future Prosecutor General.” From this article it also became clear that the position of our “virtue” Boris Abramovich Berezovsky in the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation has strengthened significantly.

Moreover, at the beginning of February 1999, in the development of the same negative situation, I was faced with the fact that they stopped introducing me to the results of the operational-search activities carried out on my instructions in the criminal case that was in my proceedings?! There is probably no greater absurdity. The operatives told me who introduced this ban.

No one dared to help me in that situation.

Actually, what was not wrong in gloomy prospects investigation, was confirmed during personal communication with the new head of the department for investigation of particularly important cases of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation V.O. Lyseiko.

In the conversation, Vladimir Onufrievich, slyly squinting, spoke in the sense that I understood that Listyev’s case had lost its relevance.

Below I will tell you about the outrageous facts that the investigation encountered.

I’m not looking for any excuses, but it would also be unfair not to talk about it.

Above, I already wrote about the “help” to the investigation from Boris Berezovsky, who was far from the last person in the then political hierarchy of the country.

But there was also an outright betrayal of the interests of this case. “When you are betrayed, it’s like having your arms broken. You can forgive, but you can’t hug anymore,” wrote Leo Tolstoy.

Moreover, as was recorded, from the top officials of two federal departments, the deputy chairman of another important institution and someone else. I don’t understand how one can rise to such heights, but in one’s actions be no different from an ordinary market woman. No, perhaps I offended the merchant, she trades legally. So she is fine with her motivation for her activities.

Our “heroes” traded illegally, “under the counter.” The state delegated great powers to them, gave them huge offices, official cars, assistants, secretaries, deputies, just so that they would zealously observe its interests. But in fact, these gentlemen were engaged in activities directly contrary to the interests of the state.

What were they pursuing when they warned our defendants about the danger that threatened them? When were people reasonably suspected of committing a serious crime informed that they were under our attention specifically in connection with the investigation into Listyev’s murder? FSB employees informed the investigation about this and provided relevant materials. This information was communicated to the Prosecutor General Skuratov.

I don't remember why this information was not properly appreciated. Either a scandal began with his removal from office, or something else happened.

It is quite obvious that such “punches in the gut” were dealt to the investigation.

It is unlikely that anyone will doubt that these high-ranking “figures” from among the “sympathizers” or “participants” did not know the provisions of our Constitution of the Russian Federation:

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

About everyone's right to life,

That a person, his rights and freedoms are the highest value,

That the rights of crime victims are protected by law.

Therefore, it is unnecessary to talk about the presence in their heads of any remnants of morality and morality. After all, it was absolutely obvious to them that the persons who came to the attention of the investigation were suspected not of petty hooliganism, but of a cruel and cynical contract murder of a famous person due to selfish goals. This circumstance also indicates that among the representatives of the then highest political class there were also very unprincipled individuals.

In addition, our opponents had good “exits” to officials of the highest rank of the then Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. We knew about their contacts. Hearings of operational work on the case were held there. At the same time, I do not want to question the decency and honesty of those employees who directly worked in the task force.

We also knew about cases when, with the help of such “connections,” attempts were made to lead us down the wrong trail, planting either versions of the murder or the “criminals” who committed it. I know that the directors behind these scripts were extremely unhappy with our rejection of their gimmicks. But such firmness of the investigation, on the other hand, convinced our opponents that we were “not wandering into heaven” and responsibility could soon come. It would seem that an easy and short way is for a person to confess to the murder and tell a “fable” about how he committed it. You just formalize the procedure correctly, tell him here and there where he is confused and that’s it - the case is solved, celebrate your victory. But such “Pyrrhic victories”

we didn't need it.

The French philosopher and thinker Denis Diderot wrote: “Sincerity is the mother of truth and the sign of an honest person.” While investigating this case, we truly sincerely sought the truth and did not pursue any other goals.

I believed that we were moving in the right direction and, oddly enough, time was our ally. They continued to collect evidence bit by bit. And, if not for the fiasco with the Prosecutor General, who knows, maybe some “comrades” would already be “free with a clear conscience” for committing this murder.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Group investigators

The results of any work depend on the competence and professionalism of its performers. Conducting a preliminary investigation is no exception. Experience, integrity, integrity and professionalism are necessary conditions for conducting a quality investigation. I can’t say that the group’s investigators were specifically selected for this case. People were included in the composition for various reasons. I'll briefly talk about some of them.

At the end of 1996, he sent a separate order to the city of Saratov to carry out a number of investigative actions. It was carried out by the investigator for especially important cases of the regional prosecutor's office, first class lawyer (captain) Dmitry Nikolaevich Zagorodnev. And so impeccably, completely and competently that I decided, if possible, to take this investigator into the investigation team. It was necessary to find out his wishes, because a person may have problems with business trips.

In a conversation, Dmitry said that he would be interested in working in such a team, but this issue needs to be resolved with the regional prosecutor Nikolai Ivanovich Makarov. I called the regional prosecutor. By the way, he later became Deputy Prosecutor General for the Central Federal District. But Nikolai Ivanovich “in no way” wanted to let D.N. Zagorodnev go. to Moscow. He said that he was busy and offered me other candidates.

I also learned that shortly before this Zagorodnev D.N. completed the investigation into one of the most complex criminal cases of mass gang murder with 8–9 defendants. In addition, at that time the Saratov region was one of the few regions where a jury court was already functioning. This circumstance also required special professionalism of the investigators whose cases were considered by such a court.

All this reinforced my opinion that Zagorodnev D.N. - a smart investigator and I definitely have to “get” him. Since Makarov N.I.

did not want to meet halfway, I had to turn to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Yu.I. Skuratov. And only after the instructions of the Prosecutor General, Zagorodnev D.N. in March 1997 he was included in the investigation team. As expected, he turned out to be a knowledgeable, modest and decent person. For example, much time later, I learned that Pyotr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

that he is the grandson of the Hero Soviet Union Vasily Ivanovich Zagorodnev, captain, commander of an anti-tank company, who died in battle in 1944 on Polish territory.

There was something about Dmitry from his grandfather. He worked conscientiously and very efficiently. Despite his youth, he could be relied upon in any matter. Thus, I “had a reliable shoulder” in the group.

We worked together until I retired. In the future, the professionalism and hard work of Zagorodneva D.N. were noticed. In the prosecutorial and investigative field, he held a number of positions, up to the head of the investigative department of the Investigative Committee for the Central Federal District.

I don’t know why, but, unfortunately, in 2015, at the age of 47, he retired with the rank of Lieutenant General of Justice. It's a pity that it's so early and with such decent experience. Now he works in a well-known state company.

Investigator Elsultanov Sharan Magomed-Alievich was also qualified and worked diligently in the brigade. He was included in the group at the suggestion of the head of the investigation department, V.I. Kazakov.

As I understand it, they investigated a crime together in the North Caucasus. Sharan modestly kept silent, but joined us, not only as an experienced specialist, but also, having academic degree candidate of legal sciences. I found it useful to consult with him while working together. Subsequently, Sharan occasionally appeared in the press in connection with the investigation of various high-profile criminal cases. He became a senior investigator for particularly important cases under the Chairman of the Investigative Committee of Russia, and currently Major General of Justice Elsultanov Sh. M-A. heads one of the departments of the Main Investigative Directorate of the TFR (Investigative Committee of Russia).

Elena Viktorovna Antipenko was seconded from Moscow.

She worked efficiently and without any comments. Responsible and proactive. As far as I know, Elena Viktorovna is currently a senior adviser to justice (colonel) and deputy head of the Prosecutor General’s Office for supervision of investigations in the Investigative Committee of Russia.

Also, investigator Lakhtin Valery Alekseevich was sent from the prosecutor's office of one of the districts of Moscow. He coped with the assignments assigned to him. Now he is a senior justice adviser (colonel) and a senior prosecutor in one of the departments of the Russian Prosecutor General's Office.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

The Oryol Regional Prosecutor's Office assigned Yuri Petrovich Shcheglov, a district investigator, to the group. Yuri Petrovich was a mature man with relevant experience. I would say that in the case, first of all, he was distinguished by scrupulousness, which is a good trait for an investigator. Currently, senior adviser to justice Shcheglov Yu.P. - Prosecutor of the city of Apatity, Murmansk region.

Other good investigators also passed through the group. I ask their forgiveness if they are offended that I did not mention them.

–  –  –

A special place in the investigation of this criminal case was occupied by the questions international cooperation in connection with our requests for legal assistance. As I remember, we addressed such requests to the competent authorities of the USA, England, Germany, France, Switzerland, Austria, Israel, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Latvia, Ukraine and some other countries.

In Switzerland, I had to contact directly the forensic investigator of the canton of Geneva, Georges Zexchen. He led the investigation into the case of Russian citizen S.A. Mikhailov.

I went to Geneva, where, together with Mr. Zekshen, we carried out investigative actions. From Geneva airport, where I and translator Natalya Kozienko were met by a forensic investigator, we were taken to a restaurant for breakfast.

We drank another glass of wine, as is their custom, and then arrived at the Palace of Justice in Geneva.

There he gave Mr. Zekshen a response from the Russian Prosecutor General's Office signed by Katyshev with attached materials of investigative actions carried out at his request in Russia. After reviewing the documents presented, Zekshen, as I noticed, was somewhat upset. But I honestly told him that if the Russian prosecutor’s office had materials about Mikhailov’s specific crimes, we would have opened a criminal case and brought him to justice, despite the interest of the Swiss side in him.

After discussing our plan of action for the next day with Mr. Zekshen, we went to the hotel. At the same time, I remember that he was pleasantly surprised when he answered him in French - “Je parle un peu franais.” (I speak French a little). He asked where I studied. He answered without false modesty - at Moscow State University.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

The next day, October 22, 1997, Mr. Mikhailov was brought to Zekshen’s office. In the office of the coroner were Russian translator Natalya Kozienko, Swiss translator Madame Corinne Billod, sworn in, and lawyers Ralph Oswald Isenegger, Alec Reymond.

Then I saw this in Israel, but I was surprised that Mikhailov was brought into the office in shackles, shackling both his hands and feet. When they were removed, Monsieur Zekshen introduced me to Mr. Mikhailov, and I extended my hand to him and said hello. Since he was interrogated as a witness in our criminal case, he did not see any behavioral contradictions in this on his part. Rather, it indicated that I had no prejudices against Mikhailov and my participation in the interrogation meant that he

– the witness has the duty to honestly answer the questions of the Russian investigation.

At the beginning, he stated that since the Swiss investigative authorities had illegally arrested him and were holding him in prison, he had not answered their questions for more than six months and was not cooperating with the investigation. To my question, transmitted through Mr. Zekshen, who conducted the interrogation with my participation, Mikhailov replied that he was ready to answer the questions of the Russian investigator, that is, mine. And only if, after Zekshen’s question is asked, I confirm every time that this is my question too. That is, Mr. Mikhailov’s patriotic feelings awoke - he only answered questions from the investigator, a compatriot.

When the questions ended, with the permission of Mr. Zekshen, I asked Mikhailov one more question that could not help but arise in my mind. The question turned out to be long, but not only Mikhailov, but also Zekshen should have understood it.

Due to the fact that he was a representative of the General Prosecutor's Office of Russia - the body not only for the prosecution, but also for the protection of human rights and freedoms, I asked Mikhailov if there were any claims, complaints about the regime of his detention, about the way he was treated and how it is conducted criminal prosecution in the Swiss Confederation?

At first, apparently from the surprise of the question, Mikhailov became agitated.

It must be said that during the interrogation the latter behaved with dignity. He, thanking for the question, stated that he had been waiting for a long time for someone to ask him about this, especially from Russia. He has no complaints regarding the regime of detention and treatment in prison. He complains that the Swiss investigators Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

authorities illegally arrested him and kept him in custody. Thus, one of his fundamental rights is violated - to be a free person.

I asked to transfer this complaint to the Prosecutor General of Russia, Mr. Skuratov. Then the secretary present printed out Mikhailov’s testimony. He read them and signed each page of the interrogation protocol. After that, I once again extended my hand to Mr. Mikhailov and said so that Zekshen could understand: “Au revoir - goodbye (French).”

After the interrogation was completed, one of Mikhailov’s lawyers expressed a desire to meet with me separately in Geneva. I forwarded this request to Mr. Zekshen, but as I understood, he reacted negatively to this initiative.

Therefore, I told the lawyer that if they have any additional questions related to today’s interrogation, they can officially contact the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office and we will consider their appeal.

When Mikhailov was taken away from the office, his lawyers left, Zekshen asked how I move around Moscow, am I afraid of criminals?

I replied that I was moving and public transport and on a special basis, depending on the situation, as for fear, I didn’t even think about it. And not because I am some kind of knight without fear and reproach.

I just have a rule - to always act according to the law and conscience, so I don’t see any problems. And then, why should I be afraid and not them? He, pointing to his armored windows, said that he thought differently. I only noted that everyone is free to act in accordance with what he knows and what he investigates. I also told Zekshen that I don’t want to idealize the state of crime in my country, but at the same time, what is written in the press is also not all true. And, probably, he understands that journalists need sensations, so they, sometimes without thinking, “exaggerate the story.” But we must look at these things realistically.

I can’t say how the information leaked, but one local English-language newspaper wrote about my stay in Geneva. She reported that an investigator from Russia had arrived in Geneva, investigating the murder of the famous television journalist Vladislav Listyev. He is conducting investigative actions with local competent authorities. After this, an employee of our embassy in Switzerland found me by phone, who expressed surprise that he had only learned about my stay in Geneva from the press. I thanked him for his concern and said that I had already resolved all the planned issues and was flying to Moscow tomorrow.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Komsomolskaya Pravda’s own correspondent in Geneva, Leonid Timofeev, dedicated his article on October 28, 1997, entitled “Mikhas was interrogated in the Listyev case,” to the interrogation of Sergei Mikhailov. Among other things, it was stated that “...The other day, Mikhailov was visited by an investigator from Moscow, Pyotr Triboi. In the presence of a local colleague and two lawyers, he interrogated the defendant as a witness in the case of Vladislav Listyev.

As we managed to find out, to all the investigator’s tricky questions, Mikhas answered that he had nothing to do with this crime, since by the time it was committed he had already left the country.”

But how is Oleg Yakubov, the author of the book “Mikhailov or Mikhas?” M.: Veche 2013, from the words of Sergei Mikhailov, spoke about this Geneva interrogation: “...In October 1997, Zekshen summoned me for interrogation and introduced me to the investigator of the General Prosecutor's Office of Russia, Peter Triboi. After going through all the necessary formalities, the Swiss investigator began asking me questions. I was surprised and did not consider it necessary to hide my surprise: “Peter Georgievich, what’s going on, why don’t you ask your own questions? The fact is that I, using my right of silence, do not answer investigator Zekshen’s questions, about which I made an official statement.” Triboy replied that this was the procedure for conducting interrogations in Geneva. He added that all the questions that investigator Zekshen asks were prepared by him, Triboy, and he earnestly asked me not to refuse answers. I noted that I would assume that the questions were being asked by a Russian investigator, and I agreed to answer. During the interrogation, I turned to Mr. Triboi several more times and saw how angry this made Zekshen. But I still answered all the questions: I had nothing to hide..."

Subsequently, as far as is known from the media, the jury of a Swiss court found Mikhailov completely innocent. Moreover, the court decided to compensate Mikhailov in the amount of half a million dollars.

Fruitful cooperation has developed with the representative of the State of Israel police in Moscow, Brigadier General of Police Aron Tal.

Mr. Tal spoke Russian well and this circumstance greatly facilitated our work. Being from Poland, the father of General Tal, rose to the rank of captain of the Red Army in the Great Patriotic War. As I understood from further communication, Mr. Tal had a friendly attitude towards our country.

I also had to visit Israel. Together with investigators from the Department for Combating international crime in the city of Petah Tikva Reuven Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Roskis and Chaim Kaspi interrogated several citizens of the State of Israel. Conducted two searches in this country. Moreover, as the Israelis explained to me, this was the first case in their country when an investigator foreign country received a court decision to produce them. The fact is that the consultants of the Ministry of Justice of the State of Israel were not particularly enthusiastic about our request for searches. With this conclusion of the Ministry of Justice, together with Reuven Roskis and Chaim Kaspi, they came to the Tel Aviv court. Moreover, General Tal said that in their country everything is decided by the court and if I and co-rapporteurs Roskis and Kaspi manage to prove the need for such permission, then we can get it.

One more feature of the situation in the Tel Aviv City Court should be noted. When we got out of the car and headed to the central entrance to the court, we were surrounded by a mass of photo reporters who continuously photographed us all the way until we entered the courtroom.

When I asked what this excitement was about, my colleagues replied that, most likely, the reporters don’t even know who we are. They simply take photographs of us, and if some sensation later emerges related to our stay in court, they will immediately sell our photographs to any news agency.

The appeal was considered by a single judge. It seemed to me that she was a thoughtful young woman, no more than 40 years old. At the court hearing, she stood me up and asked why the searches were needed. With the help of an interpreter, I briefly told her what I was investigating and why the searches were necessary.

Investigators Roskis and Kaspi said that they delved into the materials I presented and believe that searches need to be carried out, and, therefore, a court decision is necessary. The judge retired to the deliberation room. Returning, 10-15 minutes later, she announced her decision - to grant the Russian investigator’s request - to allow searches to be carried out in two offices! And this despite the opposite opinion of the country’s Ministry of Justice. I received all the requested documents from Israel, including copies of materials from an entire criminal case investigated by Israeli investigators. For obvious reasons I cannot give details.

My stay on a business trip in Israel (September 1996) coincided with the Jewish New Year holiday, and I was invited to a ceremonial meeting of the management that received me.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

Some employees were given awards, certificates, and regular special titles. Then they unexpectedly gave the floor to me. At the beginning I was a little confused, but then I pulled myself together and went out in front of the audience. There were about three hundred employees in the hall. I congratulated them on the holiday. I told you a little about our organization. He said that our prosecutor’s office oversees compliance with the Constitution, execution of laws, and coordinates the activities of all law enforcement agencies to combat crime. At the same time, the investigative apparatus of the prosecutor's office investigates the most serious crimes in the country. Noted positive value cooperation between our two countries in the criminal legal field. He thanked his colleagues for their interaction and said that if they contact us, we will reciprocate. People applauded warmly after my brief speech.

I know that after me, my colleague, senior investigator for especially important cases, Ruslan Sugaipovich Tamaev, went on a business trip to Israel. He was also pleased with the results of the joint work.

The Israelis also came to us and, as far as I know, they were also satisfied with what had been done.

Cooperation in the framework of the criminal investigation with the legal attaché of the Embassy of the United States of America in Russian Federation- Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) employee Denis Cosgrove.

Following our requests for legal assistance, through Mr. Cosgrove, I received from the United States all the documents we were interested in. Denis also responded to other inquiries regarding criminal cases sent to the United States by our investigators.

Denis also visited us at work. Our immediate supervisor received him. Not without a “glass” of tea. During the “tea party,” one of my colleagues gave Denis his white general’s jacket. How we laughed when, during Denis’s next visit to us, a colleague said that today at the meeting he needed to wear a white jacket, and he gave it to him.

In response, Denis joked: “Vladimir, 20 dollars and I’ll give you a jacket for two hours to participate in the meeting.”

“This is the American trait of enterprise,” one of his colleagues remarked, smiling. Denis, of course, was a professional and a pleasant person to talk to.

Petr Georgievich Triboi | “Murder of Listyev. An investigation that has become irrelevant"

I remember, in my opinion, at the celebration of US Independence Day - July 4th, along with other employees of law enforcement agencies: the prosecutor's office, the FSB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, we were invited from the investigative department.

At the residence of the US Ambassador to Russia - Spaso House, Denis cordially greeted us and introduced us to the US Ambassador, Mr. James Collins, and his chief superior, US FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was then on a visit to Moscow. We exchanged handshakes and some phrases appropriate for the occasion of the holiday, and then stepped aside.

But the interaction with the French gentlemen did not work out very well. They did not respond to our request for legal assistance for a very long time. Moreover, they simply lost the first appeal. Due to such negligence, on the instructions of Yuri Ilyich Skuratov, I had to meet with the legal attache of the French Embassy in Russia. I don't remember his last name. He said that since our request for legal assistance in such a critical criminal case was being executed so carelessly, the Prosecutor General of Russia authorized me to inform that the same attitude could be shown towards the requests of the French side to Russia. Moreover, their requests for procedural actions in Russia go through the Prosecutor General’s Office. As I was told, at that time there were two or three requests for legal assistance in Russia, including, I remember, a group murder committed by a minor in France. The French representative proposed sending a new request, which after some time was fulfilled.

"StavTM-group" OGRN: 1122651030226 INN: 2634807278 Stavropol 355003, Stavropol Territory, Stavropol, Team of Managersgroup st. R. Luxemburg, 61 tel.: 8 8652 23-18-95,89187405444 e-m...” functional structure of populations V.N. Beklemishev Second edition. First publication in 1960* When they say... "the work of the commission to control the export of high-tech goods, technologies, and other results..."

“Making effective management decisions using modern simulation technologies This presentation should be viewed in full screen mode (Ctrl-L in Adobe Reader) Simulation modeling in logistics. System dynamics and management consulting Natalya Nikolaevna Lychkina, Chairman of the Russian Department...”

"A. D. Koshelev ONCE AGAIN ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF LEXICAL MEANING* 0. In semantic research in recent years, it has become almost a tradition to take the formulation of its meaning from an explanatory dictionary as the starting point for the analysis of a lexeme. Further, in the process of analysis, the researcher shows the inaccuracy of this formulation (which, as a rule, only covers ... "

“JSC Central Securities Depository Approved by the decision of the Committee of the Board of Directors of JSC Central Securities Depository on Strategy (minutes of the meeting dated February 4, 2010 No. 4) REPORT on compliance with recommendations international organizations for settlement and clearing systems of Almaty, 2009 Report on compliance...”

“APPROVED by order of the Federal Agency for State Property Management, exercising the powers of the annual General Meeting of Shareholders of SO UES JSC, dated June 30, 2016 No. 523-r. Preliminary approved by the Board of Directors...”

“Anarchism and Religion Max Nettlau The only connection between religion and anarchism is, in my opinion, that they occupy places at opposite poles of human evolution. Religion, in its early...”

"7. Average salary in Russia (by region) and other countries of the world in 2015. [Electronic resource]: URL: http://bs-life.ru/rabota/zarplata/srednyaya2015.html (access date: 09/30/2015).8. Salary levels in the USA [Electronic resource]: All the most interesting things about the USA. Access mode: http://thisisusa.ru/salary_... "

«decisions how the amount of milk could be increased to satisfy the needs of the population in dairy products. UDC 636.178.2 TRAINING AS A FACTOR..."

“THE time for retirement. It is assumed that preparation for retirement consists of 3 parts: Reducing the rhythm of activity: it is advisable to begin to free the employee 1) from a number of work responsibilities or narrow the scope of responsibility in order to avoid a sudden abrupt ... " 2017 www.site - “Free electronic library - various documents”

The materials on this site are posted for informational purposes only, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.