Hunting accidents, unfortunately, have become commonplace. Almost every week information appears in the media that an accident occurred during a hunt – either a huntsman, or a hunter, or an ordinary resident who went out into the forest died.
The investigation of such cases is quite complicated, because in order to form the materials of criminal proceedings, it is necessary to restore the whole picture of the murder, and correctly establish the guilt of the participants in the tragic events.
Yesterday, the press reported that during a hunt in the Smolensk region, an accident occurred with the participation of the prefect of the Central Administrative District of Moscow, Vladimir Goverdovsky – a huntsman was killed. At first it was not known who fired the fatal shot, but later there was evidence that Goverdovsky fired. Whether the official will be held accountable for the murder or will be excused – we understand the material of the Kompromat1 portal.
Chronology of events
Closer to noon on November 5, information appeared in the media that during the hunt, in which the prefect of the Central Administrative District of Moscow, Vladimir Goverdovsky, took part, something irreparable happened. According to official data, when the hunters drove the wild boar, the huntsman entered the line of fire, violating the safety rules. The shot hit the victim. The hunters immediately called the police and an ambulance. The huntsmen tried to resuscitate him in an ambulance for two hours, but nothing worked – he died.
At first, the picture of the crime was very vague. But over time, facts began to open up that indicate that there is still Goverdovsky’s guilt in the (unintentional) murder.
Later it became known that Goverdovsky arrived alone at the Vostok base in the Smolensk region to hunt a wild boar. Accordingly, it is not necessary to say that someone else could have fired a shot at the huntsman. It is noteworthy that all our sources say that Goverdovsky is involved in the criminal case as a witness. And a lot indicates that they want to whitewash the official, throwing all the blame on the late huntsman.
So, officially, the picture of the crime is as follows: Goverdovsky arrived at the Vostok base, changed clothes, and on the evening of November 4, together with the hunter, went into the forest to hunt a wild boar. After entering the position, Goverdovsky allegedly saw an animal, and, at the command of the hunter, fired a shot, but missed. The bullet ricocheted and hit the huntsman, who was in the bushes behind the boar. The penetrating wound was in the left side of the body, the bullet stuck in the chest. The hunter tried to take resuscitation measures, but the huntsman had no chance of surviving. The ambulance, which arrived at the scene about half an hour later, also tried to save the victim, but without a chance.
This version sounds fantastic. Firstly, it is not clear what the huntsman was doing behind the boar, and secondly, there is no explanation from what the bullet could ricochet. Therefore, more questions than answers remain.
According to a law enforcement source, things were different. Indeed, Goverdovsky arrived at the Vostok base in the evening of November 04 himself with his personal weapon. After it got dark, the hunter took the client to the fields next to the boar trails. On the spot, a local huntsman was waiting for them on the Trekol all-terrain vehicle (this is an important detail). After talking a little with the huntsman, the hunters went to the observation tower, but on the way, it seemed to Goverdovsky that a wild boar was standing in the dark. He fired two shots without warning, but instead of the sound of hitting an animal, there was a sound of hitting metal. The hunter went to find out what happened, and saw the same all-terrain vehicle “Trekol”, in the hood of which two bullets hit. One bullet lodged in the skin of the vehicle, another ricocheted off the hood and mortally wounded the huntsman. In this scenario, things become completely different. It turns out that Goverdovsky’s fault is much greater than what was described in the official version of the incident.
It all comes down to the fact that they want to make the official a “victim of the situation”, and shift all the blame onto the deceased huntsman. Moreover, he is already dead, he does not care.
Friends from crime
Then the situation played out unexpectedly. As it turned out, Vladimir Goverdovsky repeatedly came to hunt at the Vostok base. Moreover, this happened in a large company, along with other VIP guests from Moscow. The enterprise that owns the land belongs to the son of a scandalous Moscow businessman with a corner past, Pavel Te German.
It is clear that Goverdovsky did not accidentally go hunting to the base of a Moscow entrepreneur who had his own interest in him. Thanks to his close friendship with Goverdovsky, Cho resolved his issues in the Central Administrative District of Moscow.
Still, we do not forget that Goverdovsky has been the prefect for more than 7 years. Not only in his district, but also in cooperation with other Moscow colleagues, he greatly “helps” Cho to develop the business. As far as it is legal – you understand.
Goverdovsky is an important figure in the activities of Cho projects, therefore everything converges to the fact that no one will seriously investigate the case against the official, but the huntsman who was in the wrong place at the wrong time will still be made guilty.
http://vlasti.info/news/52475-kak_pytajutsja_otmazatj_ot_ubijstva_egerja_prefekta_tsao_moskvy_vladimira_goverdovskogo
