Pressure or diversion tactics in flawed Reva Trial
The car of Dmytro Reva’s lawyer and sister, Oksana Tomchuk, was broken into during the early hours of Friday morning. The car window was smashed, and documents pertaining to the defence’s case stolen.
Oksana Tomchuk learned of the break-in from her neighbours. She notes that more valuable items were not taken: expensive glasses; a leather-bound business card container; a baby’s seat. Those who broke in did not even try to steal the tape deck. “All the things that most interest thieves were left. Yet they turned all documents upside down, taking only those with Reva’s name on them.”
The documents are important and pertained exclusively to the terrorist acts in Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhya and Kharkiv.
As reported here, Dmytro Reva has been remanded in custody now for 15 months on charges which a top criminal law expert has slammed as lacking any element of a crime. He is accused of having been an accomplice because he was in the centre (paying a bill) during the hour or so in which four explosive devices went off in Dnipropetrovsk on 27 April 2012. He was in the vicinity of two of the explosions, although explosives experts confirm that there was no way of knowing when the devices would explode. An hour later he received a text message from one of the main defendants asking if he and their mutual acquaintances were OK. Despite the fact that the same message was sent to a number of other people, and there is no proof of Reva’s “complicity”, the court has persistently refused to release him.
Oksana Tomchuk says that on 8 September a car tyre suddenly went flat in the middle of the bridge across the Dnipro River. At the station, she was told that the cut in the tyre could have been made deliberately. At the time, she says, she did not take that particularly seriously, but now she is certain that the tyre and the break-in are inter-linked.
“I view this as an attempt to put psychological pressure and to intimidate Reva’s defence and family. This may be provocation aimed at escalating conflict in the case. We have recently uncovered a whole range of systematic falsifications in the case which do not only concern Reva, who had absolutely no involvement in the terrorist acts”. She explains that as well as the phone call made by an SBU ]Security Service] officer from Reva’s phone in an attempt to produce evidence against him, they have uncovered other irregularities. These include destruction by the police of video evidence and the planting of letters supposedly containing demands for money from terrorists.
“And we have literally just established that the Security Service could have prevented the series of terrorist attacks in Dnipropetrovsk in April last year, and arrest Sukachev and Fedoryak long before that since they had a video showing Fedoryak and a witness who identified him after the first explosion in Dnipropetrovsk in November 2011.” She says that there are quite specific people within the enforcement bodies who should answer for this, and who are instead trying to drown out the information by creating noise on other subjects. She says that the law enforcement management has more brain and that they should be interested in finding those engaged in such provocations.
She is adamant that she will not be stopped, until Reva is freed and Ukrainians learn who really planted the bombs.