Source: https://sozai.app/transcript/youtube-video-transcript-459/ Case review of Anton Dolgikh accused of assaulting a Russian penitentiary officer, detailing charges, evidence, and risk factors for detention. ## Key Takeaways - Dolgikh is charged with assaulting a government official while aware of his status. - Strong evidence supports the charges, including multiple witness statements. - Risk of flight and obstruction of justice justify pre-trial detention. - Dolgikh’s prior convictions and behavior indicate a high risk of reoffending. - Victims and witnesses require protection due to fear of retaliation. ## What the video covers - Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh is accused of using violence against Gavrilov, an officer of the Federal Penitentiary Service in Kirov, on September 17, 2026. - Dolgikh was previously detained from February to November 2025 under pre-trial detention related to other charges. - The assault involved Dolgikh striking Gavrilov on the left shoulder, causing physical pain but no serious injury. - Dolgikh has a prior criminal record including convictions under Articles 33 and 285 of the Russian Criminal Code. - He refused to testify or admit guilt during questioning, but evidence includes victim and witness testimonies, crime scene inspection, and operational search results. - There is a risk Dolgikh may abscond due to lack of registered residence, prior convictions, and a purchased airline ticket to Turkey. - Dolgikh’s computer skills and internet presence raise concerns about potential obstruction of justice through digital means. - Victims and witnesses fear retaliation from Dolgikh, who may attempt to influence or threaten them via social media or other channels. - Dolgikh lacks stable employment, official residence, and social ties in Kirov, increasing flight risk and justifying pre-trial detention. - The investigation highlights Dolgikh’s propensity for crimes against public order and administration, posing ongoing danger to society. Answers ## Questions about this video What crime is Anton Dolgikh accused of in this case? Anton Dolgikh is accused of using violence against Gavrilov, a government official and officer of the Federal Penitentiary Service, which is classified under Part 1 of Article 318 of the Russian Criminal Code. Why is pre-trial detention considered necessary for Dolgikh? Pre-trial detention is justified due to Dolgikh’s prior criminal record, risk of fleeing the country, potential to obstruct justice via internet access, and the danger he poses to victims and witnesses. What evidence supports the charges against Dolgikh? Evidence includes the victim’s testimony, witness interrogations, crime scene inspection, operational search results, and other investigative materials confirming Dolgikh’s involvement. ## Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown 00:01 Speaker A So, moving on to the preliminary review of the case, I submit to the court criminal case 1260233. From the investigative department for the district regarding a report of the use of violence by Dolgikh against a government official, an officer of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region, Gavrilov, on September 17 of this year at 20:48 at the address: Kirov, Kazanskaya Street, building 22B. During the investigation, it was established that in the period from February 19, 2025, to November 19, 2025, Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh, born June 6, 1977, was detained at SIZO-1 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region at the address: Kirov, MOPR Street, building 1, in accordance with a court decision choosing a preventive measure of pre-trial detention for that period. At that time, Gavrilov, an officer of SIZO-1 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region, was performing his official duties in relation to Dolgikh. On September 17, 2026, around 20:00, Dolgikh, while near the house at the address: Kirov, Kazanskaya Street, building 22B, met the previously known Gavrilov, who had previously performed his official duties regarding him at the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region. After that, Dolgikh, realizing that Gavrilov was a government official performing his official duties, used violence against him that was not dangerous to his health, namely, intentionally used force by striking Gavrilov with his hand in the area of his left shoulder, causing the latter physical pain. Thus, Dolgikh's actions show signs of a crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with Articles 91 and 92 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, on suspicion of committing the crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh, born 06/06/1977, was detained. A native of the city of Kirov, having no registration on the territory of the Russian Federation, actually residing at the address in the city of Kirov, self-employed, married, and having three minor children. Previously convicted under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. On [date], Dolgikh was charged with committing the crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. When questioned as a suspect and accused, Dolgikh refused to give testimony and did not express his position regarding his involvement in the crime or his guilt. However, Dolgikh's guilt in the act incriminated to him is confirmed by the evidence collected in the case: the testimony of the victim Gavrilov, the interrogation protocols of witnesses Zeleneev and Krysov, the crime scene inspection protocol, the results of the operational search measures, and other evidence obtained during the investigation. Dolgikh's detention on suspicion of committing the aforementioned crime is justified. The investigation has grounds to believe that Dolgikh committed the specified crime, as the victim and witnesses pointed to him as the person who committed the crime. Criminal proceedings are currently at the initial stage of the investigation. At present, there are grounds for choosing a preventive measure in the form of pre-trial detention for Dolgikh, as he is accused of committing a crime against administrative order, which is classified as a crime of medium gravity and provides for a penalty of imprisonment for a term of up to 5 years. Considering that the accused Dolgikh has an unspent and unexpunged criminal record under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and that this constitutes recidivism. The investigation has grounds to believe that Dolgikh, realizing he will be held criminally liable, including potentially being sentenced to imprisonment, may hide from the authorities and the court, including by fleeing outside the Russian Federation. These arguments are confirmed by information from the "Rozskmagistral" travel agency regarding Dolgikh’s purchase of an airline ticket for a flight from Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, to Antalya, Republic of Turkey, departing on December 13, 2026, at 14:10. Furthermore, Dolgikh does not have a registered residence within the city of Kirov, the Kirov region, or the Russian Federation. Consequently, the investigation has grounds to believe that if Dolgikh remains at liberty, wishing to avoid criminal liability, he may abscond from the preliminary investigation authorities and the court. The accused, Dolgikh, possesses knowledge in the field of computer technology and has published videos on various internet platforms. During a personal search of Dolgikh, items and documents were seized from him, including a mobile phone. Remaining at liberty, Dolgikh may gain access to his internet accounts. He could remotely destroy traces of the crime on electronic information media or otherwise obstruct the criminal proceedings. In addition, the victims and witnesses in this criminal case are individuals whose personal details are known to Dolgikh. Therefore, having information about the permanent place of service of the victims and witnesses who are testifying against him, Dolgikh could exert influence on them, including through internet publications, in order to change their testimony, thereby hindering an objective investigation and the establishment of the truth in the case. The victims and witnesses questioned in the criminal case stated that they fear for their lives and health, as Dolgikh has already used physical force against an officer named Gavrilov. An examination of the accused’s personal background has established that Dolgikh does not have registration within the Russian Federation, does not own vehicles, does not have a mobile phone or an official place of work, and is not self-employed; thus, the investigation has no way to summon him for investigative actions. This serves as evidence that Dolgikh may hide from the preliminary investigation authorities and the court. In view of this, the question of other social ties that might keep Dolgikh within the city of Kirov, in the event that a milder preventive measure than detention is chosen, cannot be considered due to their absence. Furthermore, in the course of the investigation, it was established that Dolgikh has a conviction under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for a crime against state authority and the interests of the civil service in local self-government bodies, which testifies to his propensity to commit crimes. The circumstances and nature of the committed act indicate a high level of public danger. Taken together, the aforementioned allows us to conclude that Dolgikh, if left at liberty, poses a danger to society and is prone to committing crimes in public service, in local government bodies, and against the order of administration, meaning he may continue to engage in criminal activity. Furthermore, based on the entirety of the case materials, the investigation concludes that Dolgikh, wishing to avoid criminal liability and to neutralize the impact of testimony incriminating him, may threaten or pressure victims and witnesses, including by posting information on his social media or the internet, or commit other crimes against victims and witnesses—including again against the order of administration—and may also threaten other witnesses in the criminal case who have not yet been identified or questioned, including relatives and acquaintances of the victims, with the goal of changing their testimony in his favor, thereby obstructing criminal proceedings. Dolgikh does not suffer from any illnesses included in the list of severe diseases that would preclude the detention of an accused person in a pre-trial detention center. 00:22 Speaker A Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region, Gavrilov, on September 17 of this year at 20:48 at the address: Kirov, Kazanskaya Street, building 22B. During the investigation, it was established that in the period from February 19, 2025, to November 19, 00:38 Speaker A 2025, Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh, born June 6, 1977, was detained at SIZO-1 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region at the address: Kirov, MOPR Street, building 1 , in accordance with a court decision choosing a preventive measure of 00:50 Speaker A pre-trial detention for that period. At that time, Gavrilov, an officer of SIZO -1 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region, was performing his official duties in relation to Dolgikh. On September 17, 2026, around 20:00. Dolgikh, while near 01:08 Speaker A the house at the address: Kirov, Kazanskaya Street, building 22B, met the previously known Gavrilov, who had previously performed his official duties regarding him at the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Kirov Region. After that, Dolgikh, realizing that Gavrilov was a 01:23 Speaker A government official performing his official duties, used violence against him that was not dangerous to his health, namely, intentionally used force by striking Gavrilov with his hand in the area of his left shoulder, causing the latter physical pain. Thus, 01:37 Speaker A Dolgikh's actions show signs of a crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with Articles 91 and 92 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, on 01:50 Speaker A suspicion of committing the crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh, born 06/06/1977, was detained. A native of the city of Kirov, having no registration on the territory of the 02:02 Speaker A Russian Federation, actually residing at the address in the city of Kirov, self-employed, married, and having three minor children. Previously convicted under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 02:12 Speaker A . On [date], Dolgikh was charged with committing the crime provided for by Part 1 of Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. When questioned as a suspect and accused, Dolgikh refused to give testimony and did not express his position regarding 02:26 Speaker A his involvement in the crime or his guilt. However, Dolgikh's guilt in the act incriminated to him is confirmed by the evidence collected in the case: the testimony of the victim Gavrilov, the interrogation protocols of witnesses Zeleneev and Krysov, the crime scene 02:40 Speaker A inspection protocol, the results of the operational search measures, and other evidence obtained during the investigation. Dolgikh's detention on suspicion of committing the aforementioned crime is justified. The investigation has grounds to believe that Dolgikh committed the specified crime, as the victim and witnesses 02:59 Speaker A pointed to him as the person who committed the crime. Criminal proceedings are currently at the initial stage of the investigation. At present, there are grounds for choosing a preventive measure in the form of pre-trial detention for Dolgikh, as he 03:12 Speaker A is accused of committing a crime against administrative order, which is classified as a crime of medium gravity and provides for a penalty of imprisonment for a term of up to 5 years. Considering that the accused Dolgikh has an unspent and unexpunged 03:23 Speaker A criminal record under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation , and that this constitutes recidivism. 03:29 Speaker A The investigation has grounds to believe that Dolgikh, realizing he will be held criminally liable, including potentially being sentenced to imprisonment, may hide from the authorities and the court, including by fleeing outside the Russian Federation. 03:42 Speaker A These arguments are confirmed by information from the "Rozskmagistral" travel agency regarding Dolgikh’s purchase of an airline ticket for a flight from Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, to Antalya, Republic of Turkey, departing on December 13, 2026, at 14:10. Furthermore, Dolgikh does not 03:56 Speaker A have a registered residence within the city of Kirov, the Kirov region, or the Russian Federation. Consequently, the investigation has grounds to believe that if Dolgikh remains at liberty, wishing to avoid criminal liability, he may abscond from the preliminary 04:07 Speaker A investigation authorities and the court . The accused, Dolgikh, possesses knowledge in the field of computer technology and has published videos on various internet platforms. During a personal search of Dolgikh, items and documents were seized from him, including a mobile phone. Remaining at 04:23 Speaker A liberty, Dolgikh may gain access to his internet accounts. He could remotely destroy traces of the crime on electronic information media or otherwise obstruct the criminal proceedings. In addition, the victims and witnesses in this criminal case are individuals whose personal details are 04:38 Speaker A known to Dolgikh. Therefore, having information about the permanent place of service of the victims and witnesses who are testifying against him, Dolgikh could exert influence on them, including through internet publications , in order to change their testimony, thereby hindering an objective 04:52 Speaker A investigation and the establishment of the truth in the case. The victims and witnesses questioned in the criminal case stated that they fear for their lives and health, as Dolgikh has already used physical force against an officer named Gavrilov. An examination 05:06 Speaker A of the accused’s personal background has established that Dolgikh does not have registration within the Russian Federation, does not own vehicles, does not have a mobile phone or an official place of work, and is not self-employed ; thus, the investigation has no way to 05:18 Speaker A summon him for investigative actions. This serves as evidence that Dolgikh may hide from the preliminary investigation authorities and the court . In view of this, the question of other social ties that might keep Dolgikh within the city of Kirov, in 05:30 Speaker A the event that a milder preventive measure than detention is chosen, cannot be considered due to their absence. Furthermore, in the course of the investigation, it was established that Dolgikh has a conviction under Part 5 of Article 33 and Part 1 of 05:42 Speaker A Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for a crime against state authority and the interests of the civil service in local self-government bodies, which testifies to his propensity to commit crimes. The circumstances and nature of the 05:56 Speaker A committed act indicate a high level of public danger. Taken together, the aforementioned allows us to conclude that Dolgikh, if left at liberty, poses a danger to society and is prone to committing crimes in public service, in local government bodies, and against 06:08 Speaker A the order of administration, meaning he may continue to engage in criminal activity. Furthermore, based on the entirety of the case materials, the investigation concludes that Dolgikh, wishing to avoid criminal liability and to neutralize the impact of testimony incriminating him, may threaten or 06:24 Speaker A pressure victims and witnesses, including by posting information on his social media or the internet, or commit other crimes against victims and witnesses—including again against the order of administration—and may also threaten other witnesses in the criminal case who have not yet been 06:39 Speaker A identified or questioned, including relatives and acquaintances of the victims, with the goal of changing their testimony in his favor, thereby obstructing criminal proceedings. 06:50 Speaker A Dolgikh does not suffer from any illnesses included in the list of severe diseases that would preclude the detention of an accused person in a pre-trial detention center, as provided by the rules for the medical examination of suspects or those 07:03 Speaker A accused of crimes, approved by Government Decree No. 3 of January 14, 2011. No such information has been provided by the defense. The investigation believes that it is necessary to impose the pre-trial measure of detention on Dolgikh. There are no grounds for imposing a different 07:17 Speaker A , more lenient pre-trial measure in this case. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, data from the preliminary investigation are not subject to disclosure, except in cases provided for by parts two, four, and six of this 07:28 Speaker A article. In accordance with Paragraph 1 of Part 2 of Article 241 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, proceedings in court may lead to the disclosure of state or other secrets protected by federal law. This requires the interest of ensuring the safety of trial 07:40 Speaker A participants, their close relatives, family members, or other close persons. In accordance with Part 4 of Article 108 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a petition to impose a pre-trial measure of detention is subject to consideration at the place of the 07:52 Speaker A preliminary investigation or the place where the suspect is being held. The preliminary investigation is being conducted at the investigative department of the Pervomaysky district of the city of Kirov, Kirov region, that is, at the place where Dolgikh committed the crimes, as the crime was 08:04 Speaker A committed on the territory of the Pervomaysky district of the city of Kirov. Thus, the motion is subject to consideration by a judge of the Pervomaysky District Court of the city of Kirov. Taking the above into account , the investigative body has sufficient 08:15 Speaker A grounds to file a motion for the pre-trial measure of detention for Dolgikh, as provided for in points one through three of part one of article 97 . Therefore, imposing a different pre-trial measure on Dolgikh that is not associated with deprivation of 08:29 Speaker A liberty is impossible for the aforementioned reasons. Based on the above, guided by articles 97 through 101 and 108, I petition the Pervomaysky District Court of Kirov to impose the pre-trial measure of detention on the accused, Anton Vitalyevich Dolgikh, for 08:44 Speaker A a period of 1 month and 29 days. I will clarify here: that is, until December 7 , 2024. That is all from me. 08:52 Speaker A Very well, please be seated. Anton Vitalyevich, what is your position regarding the imposition of a custodial measure of restraint against you? Your Honor, it all sounds very frightening and grave, of course, and if one approaches it formally, it would seem 09:08 Speaker A that everything is exactly as stated. But, considering your vast experience, I still hope that you will evaluate all the information in its entirety, including what I will present now and what my defense attorney will present, and that you will reach a lawful and 09:22 Speaker A just decision. As it happens, I am a professional lawyer, and I have even appeared in your courtroom before. And I dare to believe that you understand perfectly well that I not only respect law enforcement officers, but I also 09:37 Speaker A believe that the entire state is based solely on law enforcement officers; without them, there would be no order. 09:45 Speaker A But I would never, under any circumstances, allow myself to use violence against a police officer, let alone an officer of the Federal Penitentiary Service or any law enforcement official. I know perfectly well that I am a thorn in the side of 09:59 Speaker A certain people, and if I only stumble, the entire system will pounce on me and crush me. I understand this perfectly well. I spent nine months in a pre-trial detention center, effectively for nothing. The cassation appeal is currently underway, and I have no doubt 10:14 Speaker A that I will be acquitted. But for now, unfortunately, it is as it is. In any case, the grave consequences that were initially charged have already been dropped; they no longer exist, and everything has been reclassified. One charge has been dismissed, and I 10:25 Speaker A believe this will continue to happen. But right now, technically, I am considered to have a criminal record. 10:30 Speaker A Your Honor, when the investigator— first of all, I was detained on the ninth, and I understand the criminal case was initiated on the eighth—why could I not have been summoned, invited by a subpoena, or contacted in some other way, or even just approached on 10:44 Speaker A the street and told, "Please come with us," as they say? I don't...well, it’s clear that my argument of "I don't understand" carries no weight, but nonetheless, I was simply thrown face-down onto the asphalt. Well, thank goodness they didn't maim me, I suppose 10:56 Speaker A I should be grateful for that, but they tightened the handcuffs. I had been handcuffed many times during those nine months. I know how it's done, but this time they were tightened so severely that there are still marks, and I have 11:05 Speaker A been diagnosed with contusions and strains to my shoulder apparatus; I was taken to the emergency room. Why was that necessary? All of this, of course, was done only to continue the reprisal against me and to keep me in custody. 11:18 Speaker A So, as I began to say, when the investigator asked me if I knew why I was being detained, I naturally answered, "No, because I had no idea." She asked, "Do I know a Gavrilov?""No, I don't know him." And when it was 11:31 Speaker A finally announced what I was suspected of, my blood ran cold. Of course, I didn't strike any officer in the detention center. That couldn't have happened, in principle. The investigator said she had solid evidence, a video recording. Let her 11:44 Speaker A produce the video recording. I understand that nothing is being considered on the merits right now, but your honor, we are talking about a person's fate, because mental health, to put it mildly, does not improve in a detention center. And I understand 11:57 Speaker A perfectly well what using violence against a law enforcement officer, an authority figure, entails. I would never have allowed myself to do such a thing. Not just violence, but even an insult. I always tell everyone: "You do whatever you want, but strictly within 12:13 Speaker A the framework of the law." And a police officer, or equally, of course, a prison officer, any law enforcement official, is a person who is untouchable in every sense. Not just in terms of physical assault, there's nothing even to say about that, but 12:28 Speaker A even verbally. That is to say, you must always know your boundaries. The investigator, well, besides saying there was a blow, I maintain, there was no blow. I didn't strike anyone on the shoulder. But furthermore, for the charge to sound the way it needs to, 12:44 Speaker A it's stated that I had just heard of Dolgikh, knowing that this person was a commander. Your honor, how would I know that some person—even assuming I had struck someone—how would I know that this person is a commander of some 12:59 Speaker A detention center unit? Where would I get that information from? In the detention center, I only know Ilya by position—Ilya Alexandrovich Kharin, head of the security department— because he introduced himself, and I interacted with him and addressed requests to him. And once I met him at 13:17 Speaker A the detention center and thanked him for his good attitude. Kharin, Ilya Alexandrovich, I think the investigation should eventually call him to give testimony. I thanked him for his normal, human treatment. I know the head of the operational department, 13:30 Speaker A Konstantin Alexeyevich Redkin, who exerted psychological pressure on me, as it seems to me, but that is his operational work, and again, I know him because he introduced himself. He actually started our acquaintance by calling me in and, for some reason, 13:42 Speaker A mentioning the name of an organization recognized as extremist, AUE, and accused me of being a member of AUE. I had only just arrived at the detention center, and naturally, I was confused at that moment. It's clear that his 13:54 Speaker A attitude toward me was prejudiced from the start. He asked, "AUE, long live the thieves." I say: "I don't understand what you are talking about, Konstantin Alexeyevich." But later he figured it out, I think, a little, and saw that I am a normal person, I behave 14:08 Speaker A normally, I'm adequate, and he said he felt neutral toward me. Although, your honor, I was kept in a special block cell the entire time. These are terrible conditions, effectively torture. And it is not for nothing that a day in a pre-trial detention center 14:22 Speaker A is equated to two days in a settlement colony, one and a half days in a general regime, and one day for a day of strict regime. The conditions there are exactly like that. So, as I have already said, I did not hit anyone. But 14:33 Speaker A even if one were to assume that there had been a strike, your honor—I will emphasize once again that I did not strike anyone. But if we assume that there was a strike, I would in any case not have known and could not have known 14:43 Speaker A that this person was a law enforcement officer. In the case materials. I don't know what evidence you have, but I beg you, request this evidence, let them present it to you. Last time, when they were choosing the pre-trial 14:55 Speaker A restrictions, investigator Smetrova told the court that I had supposedly been looking for airline tickets, although I was not looking for any tickets. I informed the court of this and asked to subpoena the laptop; it had been seized. And that I supposedly 15:06 Speaker A threatened witness Shushakova: "Your Honor, when they returned the laptop to us, the first thing we did was open it on camera and turn it on; it has been inspected. There is already a notary's inspection report." I was arrested at 15:17 Speaker A 6:00, or 7: 00—they came at 6:00 in the morning, they took me away at 7:00. 15:23 Speaker A Well, officially, I was detained at 11:00. But the visit to the aviasales.ru website, which I have never visited in my life, was at 17:00. 15:31 Speaker A But this is pure falsification of criminal case materials. That is how I supposedly was looking for airline tickets. Regarding the threats, when the interrogation took place, the case had already moved to the judicial investigation stage. They were questioning the mail carrier Lyudmila 15:43 Speaker A Shushakova, whom I have known since 2008. An elderly person, I respect and love her very much, I always helped her and would never in my life threaten her . And I ask her, taking a great risk. 15:52 Speaker A She was under state protection the entire time, living somewhere in an apartment; that is, everything was organized like that. She signed a paper prepared by the investigator. I asked her, taking a big risk, of course, because she might have been prepped for 16:02 Speaker A everything. I say: "Tell me, please, Lyudmila Nikolayevna, did I threaten you?" She looks at me, a pause, and says: "No." It was clear that this was a shock for her. Anton Vitalyevich, let's stick to the merits. 16:14 Speaker A Your Honor, thank you for giving me the opportunity to say so much. Indeed, it might seem off-topic, but this whole picture, you understand, I want your inner conviction to be formed not only based on what has been read out, but on 16:25 Speaker A everything that is happening to me. I am a person, well, I am not trying to portray myself as someone special, but everyone here perfectly understands that I am special in the sense that there is special attention on me and I 16:37 Speaker A annoy many people. That is the truth, I understand this, but I do not annoy them by breaking the law, but by my activities within the framework of the law. And in this situation, uh, I don’t know who ordered it. Again, I 16:48 Speaker A don't know that, but it is obvious that someone has decided to slander me once again. I just didn't have time to say that the judge asked: "Are you afraid of the defendant?" She answered: "No." And your honor, both grounds on which I 16:59 Speaker A was taken into custody have fallen away . In this situation, it is exactly the same thing. If, if, if there had been a blow, well, the investigator said she was sure, she would never have opened a case. She told me: "I, I have no 17:13 Speaker A acquittals at all. If I weren't sure, I wouldn't have opened the case." Anton Vitalyevich, I am sure there is a video recording. Well then, produce this video recording; it needs to be examined. And, well, but the most terrible thing in all this, in all 17:27 Speaker A these arguments, is that Dolgikh, knowing that someone (I think the name was mentioned), being a commander and so on—your honor, what evidence could there possibly be that I would know who some person is? I assert, apologies for the repetition, but these are the most 17:45 Speaker A important details. Firstly, I did not hit him. Secondly, I do not know in any case who this person is. Further, this person says he is afraid of me, just like the witnesses I heard who are afraid. So, your honor, if I am placed 18:00 Speaker A in custody, especially in a pre-trial detention center, then I fear not only for my mental health, I fear for my life, because the people there, for the most part, are normal, of course, but there are also terrible people there 18:11 Speaker A for whom doing something bad to me would be easy. It is like snapping your fingers. They could really kill me in the pre-trial detention center. It is clear that this is not an argument, but nonetheless. Now, from all these 18:26 Speaker A factual points, I will move on to the formal ones. Once again, I thank you for your patience, for allowing me to speak. Your honor, custody, holding in custody is an exceptional preventive measure. There are other preventive measures that would just as well allow 18:41 Speaker A achieving all the goals of criminal proceedings. House arrest. I’m not even asking for that. I asked the investigator: "Tell me, if it weren't for Dolgikh, would he be in custody here?" She says: "Of course not, it's always an undertaking not to leave for 18:53 Speaker A Part 1 of Article 318, but you have a criminal record. Well, you understand yourself." And in this "you understand yourself," everything is contained. 19:00 Speaker A That’s what Orova told me. "Well, you do understand." I say: "Valentina Yuryevna, if I admit guilt to you under Part 3, let me admit it, just let me out." She says: "Well, you do understand." It’s the same here. That 19:10 Speaker A is, the goal here, Your Honor, is not the compliance with the conditions of criminal proceedings. What was announced, but rather, exclusively the punishment of Dolgikh being placed in custody. I, that is, the danger to my mental health, at the very least, is 19:26 Speaker A one hundred percent if I am kept in custody, because this is a terrible place. I understand that you have some idea of it, but believe me, it is impossible to imagine the full horror. 19:37 Speaker A I got distracted again, returning to the formal grounds, house arrest. House arrest, Your Honor, will just as well allow for eliminating all the possibilities that the investigator spoke of—to make contact. And why would I need to make contact? First of 19:52 Speaker A all, all the testimonies, as I understand, have already been collected . That's it, they are collected, they are recorded, they are in the criminal case files. God grant these people health. What could I possibly do? And most importantly, why would I need to 20:06 Speaker A go up to the pre-trial detention center , meet the victim or witnesses—what for? Why would that be necessary? In my view, this argument is untenable. And, of course, I never even had any such thing in mind, and I declare that I 20:20 Speaker A will certainly not do any of that. House arrest would allow me to be kept at home, under house arrest. And at your discretion, any prohibitions can be applied. Including using the internet, means of communication, and so on—the internet, Your Honor. I 20:40 Speaker A don’t know why everyone around thinks that Dolgikh is a blogger. Dolgikh is a professional lawyer. Why am I self-employed now? Because the tax office terminated my status as an individual entrepreneur while I was in custody, because a declaration was not 20:54 Speaker A submitted. They have a formal approach, and the status of individual entrepreneur was terminated. Furthermore, one can only register again after 3 years. Just like with the criminal record, by the way, that is, 3 years. And I had been an individual 21:08 Speaker A entrepreneur since 2009. The main type of activity is legal practice. 69.10 is the NACE/OKVED code. I am a lawyer, Your Honor, I am a professional lawyer. 21:17 Speaker A I adore my work, I love it, and naturally, I feel like a fish in water in this field, on this path. And right now, I was forced to register as a payer of the professional income tax. 21:28 Speaker A That is, people call it self-employed, but officially it is a payer of professional income tax. I am still a lawyer, Your Honor. So, I do have a place of work. I am self-employed, I pay professional income tax. Uh, the 21:43 Speaker A internet, yes, a blogger. I am not a blogger, I do not publish anything on the internet. The YouTube channel " Lawyer Anton Dolgikh" is just the name, "Lawyer Anton Dolgikh." It does not belong to me, I do not manage it. The 21:56 Speaker A Telegram channel "Lawyer Anton Dolgikh" is also just a name, I do not manage it . For instance, there is the "Bloody Lady" Telegram channel, managed by Ksenia Sobchak. Well, no one says that the channel actually belongs to some " 22:05 Speaker A Bloody Lady." It is a name, Your Honor, a name that can be anything you want. 22:10 Speaker A You could even call a channel " Investigator Moskalyova," you can call a channel whatever you want. The administrator named it "Lawyer Anton Dolgikh," but I do not run it. And furthermore, it is very easy to establish by sending a request to 22:23 Speaker A Roskomnadzor. I honestly don't understand why this hasn't been done a long time ago, but now I am essentially forced to suggest it. I mean, these resources are registered. Well then, check who they are registered to. 22:35 Speaker A Therefore, I am not a blogger, I cannot exert any influence through publications, but in any case, Your Honor, all of this can be prohibited, prohibited for me. And, naturally, being a sane, adequate person, if you place me under house arrest, then, of 22:47 Speaker A course, I will not do anything that would allow for the house arrest to be revoked and for me to be sent to a pre-trial detention center. I will sit, of course, quiet as a mouse, at home at my place of residence with my children, 22:58 Speaker A with my family. I have three minor children, as has already been noted. Ours is a rare family where everything is based on love. Not on habit, like when people just live together, but on love. And if I were to stay at home, 23:10 Speaker A well, at least no harm would be done to their mental health. I have been living permanently since 2021, I think since 2021, at the address I mentioned, and I live, Your Honor, there. Registration, yes, I agree that formally it is not 23:26 Speaker A there. And this is very, again, Your Honor, of course, it will be up to you to decide. And deciding everything is always, as one judge told me, the court can justify any decision. I understand this perfectly well as a professional. 23:39 Speaker A I am telling you this so that if you make a decision and find it possible to mercifully send me to house arrest, you will take this into account. If, of course, the decision to remand me in custody has already been made, then 23:50 Speaker A none of this will help, but I want you to know about the registration. For February 4th, I already had—this can also be verified—an appointment at the office. 23:58 Speaker A October. November 4th. For November 4, 2026, I have an electronic appointment scheduled at the migration department on Molodaya Gvardiya Street to register . Well, that's how it happened. If I had been summoned for questioning, naturally, the first thing I would have 24:15 Speaker A done is go and get registered. But we didn't have time, Your Honor. The tickets, Your Honor—unfortunately, you didn't allow me to ask the investigator a question, but perhaps you could ask it. When were these tickets purchased? It might seem funny 24:28 Speaker A or amusing what I’m about to say, but Your Honor, Tanya even wrote in her letters from the SIZO: "Sweetie, just stay strong. We will rest, I will take you, I will heal you." She was preparing a surprise for me. Of course, 24:41 Speaker A I knew we were planning to go on vacation, but I didn't know anything about the hotel or anything else. I only knew it was to Turkey and that we had to leave for Kazan on the twelfth, and the tickets were for the thirteenth 24:50 Speaker A . But as far as I know, the tickets were bought a long time ago so that everything would be cheaper. Please, ask the investigator when these tickets were purchased. They were purchased— well, I was told that the incident 25:02 Speaker A where I allegedly hit someone was on September 17. They were definitely purchased even before September 17, let alone before October 8, that is 100% certain. But I have a feeling they were actually bought back in August, because the earlier you book, the cheaper the 25:18 Speaker A prices. But as I already said, Tanya was preparing a surprise for me. I didn't know anything. Our children don't know anything. I don't know anything. Only Tanya knows everything. 25:27 Speaker A And the tickets are, in any case, for the thirteenth. Well, Your Honor, if you really need to rule out the possibility of me leaving, just take me into custody for 2 or 3 days, please. 25:36 Speaker A Firstly, the tickets—I don't know, my lawyer and I were talking yesterday. The tickets must be returned, of course . I think, honestly, Tanya might have already returned them; what is the point of them? But the most important thing is that there is a return ticket. 25:46 Speaker A My defense attorney will present the return tickets now, they exist as well, Your Honor. So, as far as I understand, the tickets were bought, the hotel was booked, and return tickets were bought. 25:57 Speaker A It was a completely ordinary planned vacation with a return. Your Honor, if I had feared any kind of persecution, I would have left immediately after my release on November 19, 2025. Your Honor, I know that I have never broken 26:14 Speaker A the law, neither then nor now. Especially not after my release. I know it perfectly well. At the same time, I understand that the state, represented by certain individuals, can deal with me like this. I understand this quite fundamentally. And, of course, I live 26:26 Speaker A in fear every day. I live every day in fear that they might invent something. 26:31 Speaker A And they did invent it, Your Honor. As far as I understand, my defense attorney has reviewed the materials. As I understand it, everything is built on the testimony of two witnesses who are subordinates of this person. Your Honor 26:43 Speaker A , you are an experienced person, please evaluate all the materials in their entirety. We are talking about a person's destiny here, even though they said the illnesses don't count. I have a chronic illness, I am constantly being monitored, and I take medication 26:54 Speaker A regularly. The officers know this; I always have my medication with me in the detention center and have been taking it. Of course, these illnesses are not on the list that would prevent detention. I understand that, but I ask 27:06 Speaker A you to take this into account as well. So, I think I have said everything. But most importantly, regarding the location for house arrest, Your Honor, if you find it possible to grant house arrest and have questions, there are 27:21 Speaker A three options. The first is my place of residence, where I live. We have a large apartment, you could assign me one room, a bedroom, where I would live alone, and that's it. I wouldn't have to contact anyone, in case they decide 27:33 Speaker A to interrogate my wife as a witness again. Last time, Ametrova interrogated Tanechka in such a Jesuitical way. And because of that, house arrest at home was not possible. Well, alright, assign me a specific room, and I will live in 27:45 Speaker A it. I will live anywhere, even in the hallway. If for some reason I cannot be at my residence with the children, I can stay with my mother; my defense attorney will present her notarized consent and power of attorney. My 27:55 Speaker A mother, Olga Anatolyevna Dolgikh, is a retired lawyer from the customs service , a former head of the legal department , a retired lieutenant colonel, and a respected person. I can live at my mother's, she is a military pensioner. 28:07 Speaker A If for some reason that is impossible, I have a residential house where I can live. There is electricity there, I will manage. Your Honor, I swear to you , any place would be better than prison . Any place. I agree. Anywhere, impose 28:22 Speaker A any restrictions on me. Forbid anything you like. But I am asking you, you know me, please do not send me back into custody, because there are no formal grounds for this, and certainly no real ones. Even if we assume that, I repeat, 28:37 Speaker A I had hit someone, yes, I had no idea who that was, but I didn't hit anyone. 28:41 Speaker A That is what is most frightening. And, of course, all of this will be discussed later, but right now the issue is what measure of restraint to choose. Dolgikh might flee, Dolgikh might threaten someone. Your Honor, I cannot threaten anyone. I will not 28:54 Speaker A threaten anyone. Well, so that you know , I will not. I will take this obligation upon myself. To threaten no one, to not go near the pre-trial detention center. But in any case, this is all like a kindergarten that won't 29:02 Speaker A end, childish prattle for the third time around. House arrest will allow all the goals of criminal proceedings to be achieved. All those goals that the investigator stated, all of those goals can be achieved through house arrest. Your Honor, 29:18 Speaker A are you finished? Yes. Yes. What? Please sit down. Sergey Vitovich, your position. Topics: Anton Dolgikh Federal Penitentiary Service Kirov Region assault on government official pre-trial detention Russian criminal case Article 318 Russian Criminal Code criminal investigation witness intimidation flight risk Study this video - [Flashcards from this video](https://sozai.app/tools/ai-flashcard-generator/?from=transcript&id=78026) - [Quiz on this video](https://sozai.app/tools/quiz-generator/?from=transcript&id=78026) Free, made by AI from this transcript. No signup. --- This is the markdown twin of https://sozai.app/transcript/youtube-video-transcript-459/ — the same content, without the markup. Published by SozAI (https://sozai.app). Reuse and quotation are allowed with attribution and a link back. Machine-readable index: https://sozai.app/llms.txt · data API: https://sozai.app/api/