The court concluded the questioning of the suspect in the Parubiy murder case
On Wednesday, September 30, the Frankivsk District Court of Lviv concluded the questioning of Mykhailo Stselnikov, who is accused of the murder of Andriy Parubiy.
It is noted that the hearing began at 11:23 a.m. Present in the courtroom were the defendant, Mykhailo Stselnikov; his attorney, Viktor Ponomarenko; prosecutor Taras Kovalchuk; Andriy Parubiy’s relatives; and the victims’ attorney, Yuriy Zoshiy.
During the previous hearing, which took place on September 10, a recess was called during the defendant’s questioning. At that time, the prosecutor stated that he still had questions for Stselnikov.
At the beginning of the hearing, the defendant, Stselnikov, informed the court that he wished to dismiss his court-appointed attorney, Viktor Ponomarenko, and requested that the court appoint attorney Diana Kara through the Center for Free Legal Aid; she is also defending the defendant in the case of the murder of Iryna Farion.
However, Judge Oleksandr Velychko explained that the court cannot appoint another defense attorney on its own. According to him, Stselnikov may apply to the Center for Free Legal Aid or independently enter into an agreement with a lawyer.
The defendant also asked the court to intervene with the pretrial detention center administration so that he would be allowed to give warm clothing to other inmates. The judge noted that this matter should be resolved directly with the pretrial detention center administration.
During the continuation of the questioning, the prosecutor asked Stselnikov, in particular, about his attitude toward the events of the Revolution of Dignity and the war in eastern Ukraine. The defendant stated that he had a negative attitude toward the “Maidan organizers.”
“For me personally, the Maidan (Revolution of Dignity—ed.) is not a monolithic entity. For me personally, there are the top leaders, the leaders themselves, and there are people who were truly deceived. I have a very negative attitude toward the leaders and this government,” the defendant stated.
Stselnikov also said that before the murder, he changed his phone numbers, bought clothes and a bicycle helmet, and repaired his car. According to him, he spent about $4,000—or slightly more—on these preparations.
The defendant also stated that he had gone to Yefremova Street three times to wait there for Andriy Parubiy. According to him, he did not know exactly when the politician would appear on the street.
In addition, Stselnikov reported that he had practiced shooting with the weapon that, according to the investigation, was used to kill Parubiy. He noted that he kept the weapon in various places, namely: in the woods, in his car, and at home.
Stselnikov also said that he deleted messages in a messaging app from a person he referred to as his “handler” and changed his accounts. According to him, this person gave him advice on how to get rid of gunshot residue on his hands.
According to Ulyana Parubiy, the wife of Andriy Parubiy, Stselnikov refused to participate in a reenactment. When asked why, he replied, “What’s the point? I’d rather sit in pretrial detention and drink some tea.”
She noted that she has no doubt that Stselnikov is involved in this murder. But she asked him if he could provide even a single piece of convincing evidence that he was the one who shot her husband.
The defendant replied that the investigator has all the evidence.
This was reported by Suspilne.
As a reminder, the reading of the indictment in the case of Andriy Parubiy’s murder has begun in Lviv
As a reminder, the family of the murdered Parubiy is demanding 15 million hryvnias in moral damages.
As a reminder, the SBU has referred the case of Andriy Parubiy’s murder to court.
In Lviv, a decision was made to name a square in the city center after Hero of Ukraine Andriy Parubiy.
This concluded the questioning of Mykhailo Stselnikov in court.
At the next hearing, on October 12, the court will begin reviewing the evidence in the case.
