“Yes, comments were made to me, but I always won the majority of votes at the Academic Council by secret ballot. Even my ill-wishers do not deny this,” Sergei Yushko said today in court. In the debate, he told how he worked at KNRTU, although the prosecution is sure that he was employed fictitiously, and how he was suddenly accused of forgery of signatures backdated during the trial. His lawyer recalled the names of those who spoke in defense of Yushko – former Deputy Prime Minister Ravil Muratov, the Dyakonov couple … However, even “unpleasant testimony” played into the hands of the ex-rector, the lawyer is sure. Details – in the material “BUSINESS Online”.
“Trying to find a cat in a black room, especially if it’s not there”
Sergey Yushko planned to speak in the debate after his defenders Oleg Shemaev and Alexander Pogodin, so to speak, to summarize what they said. However, Judge Rufina Gazizova said: according to the law, it is not allowed, the defendant must speak first. The ex-rector of KNRTU-KHTI was not at a loss and approached the podium.
“I once again declare my innocence and ask you to justify me!” Yushko said. He went over the most important points in detail: first he quoted the accusation, and then he gave his argument. It sounded convincing.
What is Sergei Yushko accused of?
The accused noted that the investigation believes that he did not fulfill his official duties. “It turns out that I didn’t go to work for 14 years, but I received a salary? Your Honor, what about the testimony of several dozen witnesses questioned in court? So, all the interrogated witnesses from among the former students confirmed that I gave lectures, conducted practical classes, took tests, exams on a regular basis, ”said Yushko. The fact that he worked really, and not fictitiously, is also confirmed, according to him, by “dozens of educational programs” of the department, work plans signed by Yushko, teaching aids and scientific works by him, as well as “dozens of protocols of the academic council for 14 years”, where he participated.
The investigation indicates that students (supposedly due to Yushko’s absence) ran “to sign documents to Renat Zaripov” – the dean of the Faculty of Control and Automation. “Yes it is. And who were they supposed to run to if they studied at this faculty? – Yushko said, recalling that at the Faculty of Information Technology, which he led, initially there were no students. “But, Your Honor, did the prosecutor show at least one document that Zaripov signed instead of me? No, he didn’t. In all documents where the dean of the faculty of information technology, Yushko, is indicated, it is my signature that is written, ”the ex-rector pointed out.
Moreover, Yushko noted, he constantly went through the election procedure, for the positions of dean and head of the department. “Yes, comments were made to me, but I always won the majority of votes on the Academic Council by secret ballot – that is, more than two-thirds. Even my ill-wishers do not deny this,” the speaker emphasized.
He also noted that he was not engaged in falsifying the protocols of the academic council. “Some of the witnesses said that I could sign the security sheets later, when I became and. O. rector. And the prosecutor said that the prosecution “assumes that Yushko’s signatures could have been put backdated.” What is “could”, “allows”? I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know, the prosecution cannot be based on assumptions,” Yushko said. Moreover, the accused pointed out, he is not at all accused of falsifying signatures, the number of which, by the way, according to him, always and everywhere coincided – in the attendance lists, in the protocol in the column “presented” and in the results of voting at the council. They even matched in those protocols when, as the prosecution assured, Yushko could not be present, because he was on a business trip. “By the way, if I went to Moscow by train, as a rule, it was the Tatarstan, which has been departing from Kazan for many years at the same time – at 20:00. Whereas the academic council always ended before 14:00, maximum until 15:00,” Yushko explained.
And in general, according to him, logically, it was simply neither possible nor meaningful to engage in retrospective forgery of signatures. “If I have already become a rector, why should I put my signatures on the turnout sheets for the past 14 years? [Если] I’m already a rector, why do I need this? Yushko was indignant. “The backdated story is reminiscent of the famous proverb when trying to find a cat in a black room, especially if it is not there.”
In the second episode, according to Yushko, the investigation intentionally concealed in the indictment the fact that the agreement between KNRTU-KHTI and the Idea Technopark was signed following the results of electronic trading. This, he said, “completely destroys the prosecution’s version of pre-arranged intent.” “I was not the initiator of the competition, but the university was. If KNRTU had not submitted an application on the electronic platform, there would have been no courses at all!” Yushko said. Moreover, he pointed out, the investigation did not indicate the method of embezzling money, although Yushko actually did not reach them – he was neither the beneficiary of Idea, nor a member of the board of directors. “The prosecutor says that I disposed of the money at my own discretion, but at the same time he is silent about how this money from the current account could end up in my pocket. Why is silent? Because there is nothing to say! ex-rector was indignant.
Yushko: “To our surprise, even prosecution witnesses give in favor of the defense”
Lawyer Shemaev spoke for two hours, dwelling in detail on the testimony of all the witnesses. “The accusation is completely unfounded and does not correspond to the factual circumstances established in the court session,” he concluded. “Moreover, to our surprise, even witnesses for the prosecution testify in favor of the defense to one degree or another. In principle, this is understandable: both witnesses for the prosecution and witnesses for the defense speak about the same facts, and facts are stubborn things.
In particular, Shemaev noted, Yushko became the director of Idea, already being an employee of KNRTU, and not vice versa. And if, as the investigation claims, he rubbed himself into confidence for a fictitious placement in a university, he would have to find the location of not only the rectors Sergei and German Dyakonov, but also the employees of the departments, members of the academic council in general, so that they would vote for him at the the position of head of the department and dean of the faculty.
In addition, Shemaev noted, the indictment does not indicate which of his official duties Yushko did not perform. But it is impossible to say that he did not appear at the workplace in principle for 14 years. The work plans of the department, examination sheets, scientific works of Yushko – all this was, everywhere there are his signatures, authentic documents, which was confirmed, for example, by the representative of the victim KNRTU-KHTI Elvira Balandina and all prosecution witnesses. For example, even director of the Institute of Information Technologies Rustam Nurgaliyev, who “critically spoke about Yushko’s activities,” said that Yushko went through all the elective procedures for the position of dean and head of the department and “meet the qualification requirements” – he lectured and practiced. And Nurgaliyev’s words that Yushko allegedly improperly performed his duties are not confirmed by anything – there are no reports or complaints in the case. “We don’t know what was going on and is going on in Nurgaliyev’s soul and what grievances he has against our client, but, judging by all the documents attached to the criminal case, he always voted for [назначение Юшко]”, Shemaev summed up.
Alexei Burmistrov, Dean of the Mechanics Faculty of KNRTU, said that the department headed by Yushko was effective, and the fact that it did not graduate (that is, there were no students of its own) was not a novelty for the university, there were “a dozen” of them at the university.
Position of the defense: Rustem Khusainov, Associate Professor of the Department of IKGiAP, Arnold Altapov, Senior Lecturer of the same Department, Guzel Gumerova, Leading Programmer of the Department – all the witnesses for the prosecution – assured that Yushko worked, and told in detail how he did it. Yushko’s graduate students also came to the court – Alexander Gorchev, Marat Akhlyamov, Ramil Siraev, who told how they worked under his leadership, met regularly, discussed graduation papers, and Yushko made corrections and gave advice. The “presence” of Yushko at the workplace was also confirmed by the students from whom he took exams. Some even explained in detail where he had an office: near the 510th auditorium on the fifth floor of Building D, separate from the teaching room, which was located on the same floor.
Sergey Dyakonov about Yushko’s “truancy” for 13 years: “No, it’s completely out of the question!”
The Dyakonovs were also summoned for interrogation. For example, Sergei Germanovich Dyakonov said that it was he who proposed to create a faculty of information technology and appoint Yushko as dean and head of the department. “No, it’s completely out of the question!” – the lawyer cited the answer of Dyakonov Sr. to the question whether Yushko could not go to work for 13 years. He also added that it was he who connected Yushko to the work on the creation and development of the Idea technopark, and also said that it suited him that Yushko went on business trips at the expense of Idea, although in fact he solved university issues there. German Dyakonov, whose interrogation “BUSINESS Online” described in detail, said that he never had any complaints against Yushko and that he regularly participated in meetings of the academic council, visited the rector’s office, attended the council of deans, and conducted work at the university and the technopark in parallel – this contributed to the development of KNRTU. Dyakonov, Jr., like his father, also did not agree that Yushko could “shirk” for 13 years: “Such a situation is impossible.”
The employees of the technopark also spoke in court. For example, PR manager Yevgeny Malikov said that, at the request of Yushko, he went to KNRTU and presented the technopark and various programs to students, and vice versa – students came to the technopark, and he gave them a tour. He also said that he saw “stacks of documents” on Yushko’s desk that looked like students’ term papers and theses. Elina Valieva, an assistant to the general director of Idea, said that Yushko regularly went to the university and warned her about it, and students often came to the technopark. They even interrogated the driver of the official car of the general director of Idea: there were two passes for the car – to the territory of building D, where Yushko’s office was located, and the building of KNRTU on the street. Karl Marx, 68, where the academic council was held.
Shemaev recalled that even the former Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Tatarstan Ravil Muratov was interrogated – he attended the meeting via video link from Yalta. Muratov told in detail how and for what the authorities of the republic created the technopark “Idea” and what task Yushko set. “We knew him: he headed the student association. I listened to him a couple of times, then we met and talked. We needed such guys: young, educated, – Muratov told about the qualities of Yushko, because of which he proposed to appoint Sergey Vladimirovich as the general director of the technopark. – A very decent guy! Ever since he was [порядочным], so it remained.” Muratov also noted that Yushko was free to choose the working schedule in the technopark – the main thing is that the events do not overlap. The fact that students came to practice at the technopark and prepared their theses on projects in Idea, he called an absolutely normal phenomenon.
“Yushko made a great contribution to the development of the research and production cluster of KNRTU, successfully contributed to the development of the university’s production base, attracting investments and bringing KNRTU to a new educational level,” ex-rector Muratov praised the work.
Even “not the most pleasant testimony” played into the hands of Yushko, the defense believes
The testimony of the witness Alexander Grigorichev, who wrote the statement against Yushko, Shemaev proposed not to take into account as evidence at all. Because during the interrogation, he could not tell how he knew all the information about Yushko’s “atrocities”. According to the lawyer, the law says: if a witness cannot indicate the source of knowledge, then his testimony cannot be used as the basis for an accusation.
Even “not the most pleasant for Yushko” testimonies of vice-rector Alexander Kochnev, according to lawyer Shemaev, confirm the innocence of his client. Kochnev confirmed that the department, headed by Yushko, had a working program, which was also signed by Kochnev. If there was a program, then the work was carried out. Kochnev also confirmed the authenticity of the examination sheets and other documents. In one of the conclusions of the commission, which Yushko passed, for example, it was said that the faculty of information technology was not the strongest, it was far from the leading ones and some indicators did not meet the requirements of the Ministry of Education and Science. “But, Your Honor, the essence of our client’s accusation is not whether he worked badly or well, but he worked in general for 14 years,” Shemaev noted.
“For all the antipathy,” Yushko’s competitor in the election of the rector, Valery Alyaev, said in court that there were no complaints against Yushko as the head of the department, before the elections he was tested. Ex-projector Ildar Abdullin also said that he put his visas on the work plans of the department.
And from the “unpleasant”: there were two students, the Blinov twin brothers, who could not remember Yushko. But, according to lawyer Shemaev, it appears from the documents that they both took exams with Yushko, he approved the topics of their theses. The lawyer explained their “forgetfulness” by the fact that the brothers studied at the correspondence school, rarely appeared at the university and did not have the opportunity to constantly contact teachers. And in general, as Shemaev noted, 25 thousand students study at KNRTU, and if one of them did not know Yushko at the time when he was dean, this is completely natural: he could not lecture all students at once.
Thus, Shemaev summed up, for 13 years Yushko developed curricula for the department, work plans, gave lectures, conducted practice, supervised the work of graduate students, took exams, participated in meetings of the academic council, wrote scientific papers and passed the verification procedure before the elections 7 times . “Accordingly, according to the first episode of the accusation of our client, it should be found not guilty and acquitted due to the absence of the actual event of the crime under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation,” the lawyer said.
How professors from India and Japan were changed to specialists from Ivanovo: defense version
According to the second episode – about the theft of 1.3 million rubles allocated for courses in the technopark “Idea” for KNRTU employees – Shemaev also asked for excuses for Yushko. According to the lawyer, his client had no intent, moreover, the contract between the parties was signed following the results of the electronic auction. Firstly, KNRTU, and not Yushko, acted as its initiator. Secondly, Oksana Lampsi, an employee of the technopark, found the competition, who monitored electronic platforms and invited Yushko to participate. Thirdly, the bidding was anonymous, i.e. the bidders did not know who their competitors were, and the customers had no idea who had entered the tender. From the initial contract price of 2.9 million at the auction, it was reduced to 1.3 million rubles, and the auction lasted more than four hours, they were offered a new price 120 times. The winner was No. 2 – as it turned out, the technopark “Idea”.
“A whole volume is devoted to the electronic auction, but this information was not reflected in the indictment. A logical question arises: did the investigator do this out of forgetfulness, or did he deliberately try to hide from the court the most important circumstances of the conclusion of the contract, which directly affect the question of the presence or absence of guilt? Shemaev said.
Later it turned out that foreign specialists from India and Japan would not be able to come, and a specialist from Ivanovo was called instead. Venera Khammatova, an employee of KNITU, during interrogation said that it was she who proposed such a replacement. “Yes, the foreigners did not come, but the classes were held,” Shemaev said, noting that no one complained after the seminar.
Shemaev again pointed out the shortcomings of the investigation: it is not clear how the money was stolen, if they were received on the settlement account of the technopark, to which Yushko did not have access. In his opinion, it was necessary to conduct a forensic accounting examination in the case in order to accurately determine the amount of damage. The specialists contacted by the defenders came to the conclusion that on this contract, after deducting all taxes and other costs, Idea earned 595 thousand rubles of net profit. And making a profit, Shemaev noted, is the main goal of any commercial organization, which was Idea. No one asked the technopark to return the money after the execution of the contract, no claims were received.
Moreover, he recalled, this agreement was approved by the board of directors of Idea, which included German Dyakonov. “The question arises: how could Yushko steal money if he reported to the board of directors to the penny?” the lawyer asked the court. He immediately cited Muratov’s answer to this question: “It is completely out of the question.”
“Under such circumstances, I believe that Yushko should be acquitted,” Shemaev summed up his speech. The court announced a break in the session until mid-September, after which it will hear the opinion of Yushko’s second lawyer. It is possible that this year the ex-rector of KNRTU will hear his verdict.
