The Presnensky court of Moscow sent Dmitry Natarov, a former assistant to the head of the Rosselkhoznadzor, under house arrest for two months. He is accused of the systematic receipt of bribes from the entrepreneur, as well as lecherous actions against the minor daughter of the latter. The ex-official denies his guilt.
The trial, chaired by Judge Maria Bubchikova in the Presnensky District Court, where the issue of choosing a preventive measure to the former assistant to the head of the Rosselkhoznadzor, Dmitry Dankvert, Dmitry Natarov, was held closed to the press. This was due to the fact that during the meeting personal data of a minor victim on one of the episodes of the case sounded. The representative of the Main Investigation Department (GSU) of the TFR petitioned the court to elect a measure of restraint in the form of detention in the accused. Note that this was the second attempt to resolve the issue of the arrest of the ex-official, but last Saturday Judge Bubchikova only extended the detention of the defendant, giving the parties the opportunity to present more compelling arguments in favor of their positions.
According to Kommersant’s sources, both episodes of the criminal case against Mr. Natarov were related to a family with whom he had been friends for a decade and a half. The split between them occurred in the spring of 2019. Once a schoolgirl, who later became a victim in the case, was late for school, and her mother, who was at that time a high post in the Rosselkhoznadzor, decided to find out the reason and checked her daughter's SMS correspondence.
On the phone, a woman found a message that alerted her from Dmitry Natarov. During family interrogation, the 16-year-old schoolgirl admitted that she had been allegedly harassed for three years by a friend of the Natarov family, convincing the girl that she was already an adult.
According to the lawyer of the injured party Shota Gorgadze, this was the reason for the parents to appeal to law enforcement agencies. However, the Internal Affairs Directorate in the Central Administrative District of Moscow then opened a criminal case under part 2 of article 135 (depraved acts against a person under the age of 14 years, up to 8 years in prison) for some reason did not, limiting to part 1 of the same article (depraved acts without violence against a person under the age of 16- summer age, up to 3 years in prison).
The investigation, says Gorgadze’s lawyer, “was not going so fast,” and this forced him and his clients to turn to State Duma deputy Alexander Khinshtein. The parliamentarian sent a request to the chairman of the TFR Alexander Bastrykin and the prosecutor general Igor Krasnov with a request to give instructions to sort out the situation. As a result, in April of this year, by order of the head of the Investigative Committee, the case was transferred to the capital city department of state administration for an “objective investigation” and was taken under personal control. In the capital’s central office against Mr. Natarov opened a case under part 2 of article 135 of the Criminal Code. And later another article appeared in it - part 4 of Art. 290 of the Criminal Code (receiving a bribe). According to investigators, we are talking about an amount of about 6 million rubles. According to the case materials, the assistant to the head of the Rosselkhoznadzor for many years monthly received 30 thousand rubles for patronage. from the father of a seduced, according to the investigation, a girl who is a co-owner of a large grain company.
In court, the investigator insisted on the arrest of the former official, claiming that evidence had already been collected of his guilt in committing a crime, for which a sentence of imprisonment of up to ten years is provided. In addition, the representative of the Investigative Committee considered that remaining at liberty, Mr. Natarov could hide or otherwise interfere with the investigation. Note that Dmitry Natarov was dismissed from his post at Rosselkhoznadzor on June 27 after he wrote a letter of resignation of his own free will. Then, according to the representative of the department, Mr. Natarov explained that he did not want to cause reputational damage to the Rosselkhoznadzor, and also intended to exclude any possible accusations of influencing the objectivity of the investigation in connection with his position.
In turn, the defense said that the investigation did not provide the court with reasoned arguments in favor of the detention of Mr. Natarov, and the charges against him are based only on the assumptions and testimonies of the girl’s father. In support of his position, Dmitry Natarov’s lawyer Kirill Belsky reminded the court that the girl’s father’s statement had been in the Central Internal Affairs Directorate of Moscow for almost a year, but for some reason they could not find a criminal prosecution against the official. The defense attorney asked the court to restrict himself to his principal, if not by recognizance not to leave, then at least by house arrest.
Mr. Natarov himself, having promised not to hide anywhere and to help the investigation to figure out everything, asked the court to choose a preventive measure for him that was not related to imprisonment. He does not admit guilt on any point and considers himself a victim of a slander.
The ex-official and his defense do not specify their objections to the version of the investigation. However, Kommersant’s sources surrounding the accused suggest that the bribe episode may be explained by a recent story, which also allegedly involved a co-owner of a grain company, who was also the father of the victim. According to Kommersant’s interlocutors, some time ago, an entrepreneur turned to Dmitry Natarov, who, due to certain family circumstances, asked the official to deposit about $ 3 million in his bank cell. According to Kommersant’s source, he refused, saying that consists in the civil service, and if the money is discovered, then he will not be able to explain their origin. To ensure the safety of this money, Mr. Natarov suggested with the help of his friend, the girl’s father, and he undertook to act as a guarantor. The money was allegedly placed in the bank cell of the co-owner of the grain company, however, in the spring of last year, when the owner demanded his funds back, some difficulties allegedly arose and there was a conflict between the two businessmen and the official.
Be that as it may, the court did not satisfy the request for the imprisonment of Dmitry Natarov in jail and sent him to house arrest until August 25. The lawyer of the injured party has already stated that he will appeal against this decision.