Last year, the telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU told about the wedding of the son of the deputy chairman of the Moscow City Court for criminal cases – Ishmuratova L.Yu., her daughter-in-law, her criminal friends, but these are all flowers in comparison with the carefully concealed information about her close friend. An Oscar worthy story! So, get acquainted – Sorokin Igor Anatolievich. In 1994, the Basmanny Court sentenced him to 2 years in prison for robbery. In 1995, the Tverskoy court sentenced him to 1 year for theft. In 2007, he was convicted by the Butyrsky court for robbery, received 4 years in prison. In all likelihood, he served a year, because at first he was hiding, and then freely spent time in a pre-trial detention center. Repeatedly detained for hooliganism, driving while intoxicated. In the databases of law enforcement agencies, it is listed as the criminal authority “Beard”. And why does a recidivist robber get only 4 years in the Butyrka court? But because the verdict of the Butyrsky court was delivered personally by her honor Ishmuratova. It was in the courtroom that a spark of love flared up between judge Ishmuratova and the authority of Sorokin, which led to many years of close personal and business relations of the couple. In fact, Sorokin became and remains an intermediary between the underworld and the criminal justice of Moscow. In many cases, sentences were passed in Matrosskaya Tishina, and not in courts. Ishmuratova and Sorokin had numerous trips abroad, including to Spain, Ukraine, to a luxurious villa, information about which Lyubov Yuryevna successfully concealed from the VKKS upon appointment, but not from the public. But we have all the necessary information. In Spain, accounts were opened to store the money earned by the couple. Spain was not chosen by chance, it is well known that until recently the criminal elite of Russia lived there, whose representative was Sorokin. In addition, Sorokin also used a car owned by Ishmuratova – a Chevrolet Captiva, 2008, GRZ m015oo199. So, in July-August 2011, Sorokin crossed the Russian-Ukrainian border in this car at the Shebekino checkpoint. Given Ishmuratova’s career growth, the couple’s relationship became extremely confidential.
The new article by Rucriminal.info will focus on the long-suffering Department for Work with Appeals of Citizens and Organizations of the Moscow City Court and how the Department functions after the “cleansing” of objectionable employees under the leadership of the deputy chairman of the court Ishmuratova L.Yu.
The site of the Moscow City Court is a small but interesting field for researching the work of this Department, the head of which is the protege of the deputy chairman of the court – Rassalova V.Yu. At the time of 2019-2020. for Rassalova, work in the Moscow Qualification College with appeals failed, she had to quit. However, after quite a bit of time, after the change of leadership of the city court, when not everyone can remember the past, Ishmuratova L.Yu. returns Rassalova V.Yu. to work with appeals, but already as the head of a key Department.
So, in the vertical tab “Electronic reception” – “Extra-procedural appeals of citizens” you can see that during the period of work of the Department under the leadership of Rassalova 5 links to appeals were posted.
One appeal Mamatyuk A.A., received on June 3, 2022 in electronic form, was distributed to the responsible person Rassalova V.Yu. only on June 9, 2022, that is, after a week after its receipt and registration, while the Instructions on judicial proceedings, which the employees of the Moscow City Court should be guided by, require that registered appeals be submitted for consideration no later than the next business day, determine the executor and the deadline for execution. Simply put, for a whole week the electronic appeal hung in the program without any reaction from the court. The note about the artist in circulation is completely absent. The posted response to the applicant, signed by the chairman of the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases Shapovalov DV, on the first page of the response names Yu.K. Mironova as the executor. – assistant to the administrative board, and on the third page of the answer – Rudometkin A.V. It’s good that there is no third performer on the second page of the answer. The answer itself is dated August 8, 2022, that is, it was given more than 2 months after the appeal was sent, while the deadline for considering the appeal is 30 days.
In general, a similar situation is observed with the second appeal of A.A. The executor in the protracted response dated August 8, 2022, signed by Shapovalov D.V., is the same Mironova, the name of the judge of the MGS Gordeeva also flashes in the documents. A certificate on the complaint of A.A. Mamatyuk is additionally attached to the appeal. from the Izmailovsky district court, dated June 16, 2022. Thus, in the presence of all the necessary information, the appeal lay unanswered in the Moscow City Court for more than a month and a half, after which they nevertheless decided to give a short template answer.
The third appeal of Smirnov M.Yu., which should have been considered by the department for working with appeals, was not worked out as such, was transferred directly to the administrative board, an answer was given, which was reduced to listing the chronological sequence of the movement of the procedural document.
2 more appeals of the International Public Organization “Civil Assistance Committee” (Nikolaeva N.A.) dated October 9, 2022 and Fatyanova I.E. dated December 8, 2022 and not published at all.
After analyzing the documents officially posted on the website of the Moscow City Court, it becomes clear that the Department for Work with Appeals in the Moscow City Court, under the leadership of L.Yu. Head of the Department Rassalova V.Yu. turned into a fictitious subdivision: Rassalova holds the position of the head of the Department, receiving a monthly allowance for the corresponding position, answers to appeals, even if they are prepared, are within the timeframe far from those established by law, not always on the merits of the appeals, and in no way by the employees of the Department.
But if everything is clear with the motives of the deputy chairman of the court for the purposeful creation of such a system for working with appeals to the IGU, then where is the chairman of the court looking, on whose initiative this Department was created? Unclear…
Recall that at present, former employees of this particular Department are trying in court to restore their rights and good name, which, as follows from the published text of the decision of the Ryazan District Court of the Ryazan Region, were brought to disciplinary responsibility for violations similar to which current employees continue to commit. , as evidenced by publicly available information posted on the official website of the court.