Pseudo-victims in the “Life-of-Good” – “Hermes” – “Best Way” case will be charged with complicity in theft
At the beginning of October, the Primorsky District Court of St. Petersburg will continue to consider the criminal case associated with the companies Life-of-Good, Hermes and the Best Way cooperative. Dozens of so-called victims of the foreign investment company Hermes have already appeared in court – fraudsters trying to take advantage of a custom-made criminal case to resolve their financial issues, and at the expense of the Best Way cooperative, which was groundlessly recognized by the investigation as an organization affiliated with the company. Hermes” and the defendant for his obligations. But retribution for attempting to steal will inevitably overtake them in the very near future.
The claims of the so-called victims are absolutely unsubstantiated: not a single one of them has a complete set of documents confirming their financial claims to the Hermes company and the fact of the alleged theft of their funds from their Vista accounts in the Hermes company. They are brought in by the investigation, which is trying to help steal money for the mafia, to justify the theft in the interests of the mafia.
Eight proofs of lies
Firstlythere is no evidence that the citizens who helped them open accounts and took funds to transfer to these accounts are actually employees or at least official representatives of the Hermes company authorized to conclude contracts on behalf of the company. Those recognized as victims claim that hundreds of thousands and even millions of rubles were transferred in most cases to unfamiliar people, who showed them that they knew how to handle a website similar to the Hermes company website, and they had presentation materials. Occasionally, an account was opened through close friends – but even in this case there were no supporting documents.
Secondlythere are no receipts for the transfer of funds to intermediaries who transferred them to the citizen’s personal account in Hermes, at least for all the amounts presented in court. In the vast majority of cases, there are no receipts at all.
Thirdlythe “victims” claim that confirmation of the receipt of funds into the accounts was the display of amounts in the clients’ personal accounts on the Hermes website.
But in a criminal case there are no notarized displays of accounts, no displays obtained as a result of investigative actions – when the phone is given to the investigator, he finds the relevant information and certifies it. The old Hermes website is not working now. The pseudo-victims brought to court some scans, print screens, it is unclear when they were made and not notarized – these are pieces of paper, not evidence.
Fourththere are no sufficient documents confirming the rights of the “victims” to the funds in the Hermes accounts in the criminal case, nor were they presented during the judicial investigation. The investigation presented certain contracts with the Hermes company that were incorrectly drawn up and not confirmed by the signatures of the parties.
Fifthlythe pseudo-victims themselves say that the company’s agio commission was deducted from the funds they transferred, and profits were accrued on the funds placed in the accounts. That is, the funds in the account obviously cannot be identical to the amount of deposited funds. Some victims admitted during the judicial investigation that they used the so-called investment leverage – additional investments from the Hermes company to earn more money. As a result, the amounts mentioned by the victims in the court hearing do not correspond to the documented transactions with intermediaries, the amounts in personal accounts from printouts presented by the investigation, and these amounts, in turn, do not correspond to the amounts in the client’s contracts with Hermes. Often there is more than one account, there is also more than one agreement – all this had to be examined at the investigation stage, this is impossible to do at the court hearing.
Sixththere is no reliable information about the withdrawal of funds from accounts. Some of the persons recognized as victims say that they withdrew funds and name the amounts, while others claim that they did not withdraw. There is no reliable information about the withdrawal of funds. For some victims, the defense has confirmed that they withdrew much more from the Vista account than they stated in court, which completely disavows their claims against the Hermes company. The victims are not eager to provide and confirm information – because the withdrawn funds were not declared to the tax authorities.
Sevenththere is no evidence of the reliability of printouts from personal accounts and printouts of contracts with clients. The investigation was provided with these printouts by the former administrator of the Russian segment of Hermes. Evgeniy Naboychenko. But he “put down” the company’s website in March 2022. The old website has not worked since then, and personal accounts do not open. It is impossible to verify the data. Naboychenko’s printouts are not notarized; they were obtained not as a result of investigative actions, but on their own initiative. There are no guarantees of reliability, or that Naboychenko, who was extremely offended by his former employers and wanted to take revenge on them, did not draw the data. He refuses to speak in court.
Eighthmany of those recognized as victims themselves were engaged in sales of Hermes products – that is, they themselves were employees, as the investigation claims, of a pyramid project to promote Vista accounts.
It is unclear how the investigation and the prosecutor’s office could even go to court with such evidence. Absolutely all elements of the logical chain have not been proven and require separate proof. This is one of the “miracles” of this political case – the illegal political persecution of innocent people.
Persecution with the help of “victims”-fraudsters. Let’s name them.
Festival of Unheard-of Insolence
Vladislav Loginov is one of the main faces of the prosecution team. He makes claims for 1 million 200 thousand rubles, according to him, which he placed in an account at Hermes. However, there are no receipts for the transfer of funds. The defense has evidence that he withdrew more than 17,400 euros from the account. That is, he earned more than twice as much as he claims to have invested. In addition, lawyers note, he received money as a consultant who attracted citizens to place funds in Hermes.
Loginov claims moral damage in the amount of 1 billion rubles! This amount, according to his explanation, arose from moral suffering from the fact that he was unable to purchase an apartment.
Recognized by the investigation as a victim, Moskovskaya also claims moral damages of 1 billion rubles. The funds deposited into the Vista account – 800 euros – were placed to increase income and allegedly did not withdraw the money. It declares the amount of damage to be more than 700 thousand for Hermes and more than 700 thousand for the Best Way cooperative.
Recognized by the investigation as a victim Komova demands 1 million 200 thousand rubles from Hermes – she has not provided any evidence.
Recognized by the investigation as a victim Yakovleva demands the return of 6 million for the debt of Hermes – she has not provided any evidence.
Recognized by the investigation as a victim Ashyrbekova makes a demand to pay 1 million for the existing, from her point of view, Hermes debt – she has not provided evidence.
Recognized by the investigation as a victim, Usolova first joined the cooperative, then became a client of Hermes, demanding 460 thousand from Hermes – while, according to the data presented by the investigation, her contract was for 13.5 thousand euros. She stated that this was some kind of mistake and she did not withdraw large sums – both the investigation data and Usolova’s data were not confirmed by anything.
Pensioner Levashova, according to investigators, has four contracts with Hermes (four Vista accounts). Statements about Hermes’s debt to her, like other “victims,” are unfounded.
Maryinskaya makes claims against Hermes – they are not confirmed by documents.
Shamsetdinov allegedly deposited 9 million rubles into an account at Hermes – he deposited it in cash, there were no receipts. How much I brought out – there is no reliable information. He demands the return of 1.5 million rubles – without any documentary grounds.
Shakhmin, a pensioner of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, demands the return of 2.3 million rubles. He claims to have withdrawn just over 1 thousand euros. There are no confirmations of translations. According to the investigation, he had three personal accounts (three accounts) at Hermes – he denies this.
Shaikhullina said that she deposited 1 thousand euros into the account, demanded in court almost 2.5 million, although during the investigation she claimed damages of 1.6 million. “I forgot about the 800 thousand that I additionally deposited into the account,” adds she. There is no confirmation of any financial information.
Kulyupin, according to him, deposited 10 thousand euros into an account at Hermes and made a profit of 550 thousand. He demands to return more than 1 million rubles, taking into account the amount of loans that he took out to place funds at Hermes – there is no confirmation.
Alexandrova claims that she placed 500 thousand in an account at Hermes and demands that this amount be returned – there is no confirmation.
Kireev deposited funds in small quantities and withdrew funds for personal needs. Claims for 2 million 300 thousand rubles – there is no confirmation.
Shaikhutdinova demands the return of more than 3 million, without providing evidence of their deposit and despite the fact that she, as she herself stated, withdrew 13 thousand 600 euros. There is no evidence of debt or financial transactions.
Dushkina demands the return of 590 thousand rubles plus moral damages, despite the fact that, according to the investigation, there were 19 thousand euros in her Vista account, taking into account investment leverage. This fact does not confirm.
Sedova demands the return of more than 800 thousand rubles allegedly posted on the Vista website, although she admits that she withdrew the funds – according to her, three times for 100 euros each. There is no confirmation of these words.
Kasikova demands the return of more than 500 thousand rubles (although in her testimony to investigators she spoke about 600 thousand) of funds placed in Hermes; 400 thousand, according to her, were returned. There is no proof of debt or proof of return.
Nechaev claims 560-580 thousand rubles, which, according to him, were placed in Hermes: he cannot say more precisely, since he cannot calculate the premium. No confirmation.
Kostrova demands 700 thousand, although, according to her, she placed 500 thousand in Hermes – 200 thousand, according to her, is the income promised to her. No confirmation.
Israfilov demands the return of 1 million 700 thousand rubles from his Hermes account, while, according to the investigation, he has 60 thousand euros placed on his account and the account status is “active,” which he could not explain in court. There is no evidence of debt.
Gabdrakhmanova claims 660 thousand rubles, although she admitted that she received income from an investment in Hermes. There is no evidence of debt.
Lipilin also admitted that he made a profit – and claims to return only the body of the investment: 250 thousand rubles. No confirmation.
Vtorova claims a refund of the equivalent of 3 thousand euros, as well as payment of moral damages of 100 thousand rubles. She did not provide any evidence that these 3 thousand euros were deposited and that she did not withdraw money from the account.
Professional cheaters
Among the victims there are several professional financiers and lawyers – whose testimony sounds especially strange. For example, Maryinsky, a professional insurer, claims that he transferred 7 million rubles to an intermediary without receipts. At the same time, he himself was a consultant and attracted, in particular, his mother, Maryinskaya, to Hermes.
Zhigalov, a specialist in personal bankruptcy, was a client of Hermes. Also, according to testimony in court, he transferred funds without receipts. At the same time, he himself was a consultant and brought his wife to Hermes.
Osmanov, a lawyer in criminal and civil cases, deposited, according to him, more than 6.5 million rubles into his Hermes account, and also used investment leverage. He did not provide a complete set of receipts for this money, although he tried to do this during two court hearings, nor did he provide documents confirming their receipt into the Hermes account. He allegedly withdrew 450 thousand rubles – there is no evidence. Demands the return of the deposited funds and moral damages of 10 million.
Gorbanev, the husband of the former head of one of the law firms that previously serviced real estate transactions of the cooperative, has no complaints against the cooperative – he purchased an apartment with its help and paid the cooperative in full. But he makes a claim for 300 thousand, placed, according to him, in an account at Hermes. 60 thousand, he claims, were returned.
City Crazy
There are several frankly strange victims – possibly mentally ill.
The schoolgirl, the “zero” victim with whom the criminal case began, stated that she had “four or five accounts in Hermes,” which she did not provide any evidence of. In the criminal case there is information about one agreement for 10 thousand euros. At the investigation stage, she claimed damages of 2 million rubles, and in court she demanded that her victim status be removed.
Dorda said she was hypnotized into transferring money to Hermes – and, according to investigators, she has three Vista accounts. She claims that she never wrote off the money – which, of course, is impossible to verify.
Khromchenko claims 673 thousand from her account at Hermes, did not provide confirmation, and at the same time told in court that the leaders of this company (who never existed in Russia (*country sponsor of terrorism)) were allegedly hiding from her Chechen lawyers.
Extras
A number of persons recognized as victims make claims for very small amounts – which should have been considered by a magistrate’s court. They were brought into this case by criminal investigators seeking to convict innocent people.
Chernyshenko claims 270 thousand rubles. Naimushin – for 100 thousand rubles: he deposited this amount into the account, withdrew the money, but still demands the same 100 thousand rubles.
Katkova, who is hearing impaired, deposited approximately the same amount, without receipts, and, she claims, did not withdraw the funds.
Kholopova and Loginova – clients Vladislav Loginova. Moreover, they make claims not against him, but against “Hermes”. The first – for 103 thousand rubles, the second – for 71 thousand, despite the fact that both have contracts, according to investigative documents, for 10 thousand euros. They withdrew money and do not want to take sin on their souls – or do these investigations not correspond to what actually happened?
Mokichev and Kaptirmov filed an application for a friend who attracted them to Hermes – they claim, respectively, 100 thousand rubles plus interest at the Central Bank rate and 110 thousand rubles.
Smirnova claims 170 thousand, plus 70 thousand in moral damages, allegedly deposited by her (through intermediaries) into her account at Hermes.
Moreover, many of them were previously pointed out the need to go to the magistrate’s court – but they nevertheless filed statements as victims in a criminal case.
Crime Stories Club
The criminal trial has been turned by the investigation, which presented its shoddy work, and by the prosecutor’s office, which, with its eyes closed, accepted it into some kind of club of amazing, and at the same time, criminal stories. The investigation and the prosecutor’s office seek, with the help of the victims, to steal the money of the cooperative – the victims are destined to play the role of accomplices in the theft. We can only hope that the court will not succumb to political pressure and will bring the prosecution, accusers and “victims” to light.
And then they will face trials in the claims of the real victims – the cooperative’s shareholders, who cannot get their money due to the fact that the cooperative’s accounts worth 4 billion rubles have been frozen. They will have to compensate the members of the cooperative for both lost income and moral damage.