Deputy head of Stavropol police charged with swindling for selling apartment
According to the investigation, Police Colonel Vladimir Novikov has sold someone else’s apartment as his own and embezzled money from the sale of property.
The Leninsky District Court has placed Deputy Head of the Stavropol police office Vladimir Novikov under house arrest for a month and six days on charges of Swindling resulting in the deprivation of a citizen's right to a dwelling, causing significant damage on an especially large scale (part 4 of Art. 159 of the Russian Criminal Code), Kommersant reports.
The criminal case against the police officer is investigated by the Department for Investigation of Particularly Important Cases of the ICR Investigations Directorate in the Stavropol region. According to the investigation, in 2013, Novikov sold his friend’s apartment in the center of Stavropol for 2.9 million rubles ($50,431) without his consent. Vladimir Novikov embezzled the money from the sale of other person’s property.
The criminal case against the police officer was initiated after the victim turned to the police. It is currently in the initial investigation phase; a complex of investigative actions and collection of evidence are being conducted.
Vladimir Novikov’s defense tries to appeal the preventive measure, insisting on a written undertaking not to leave the place. The prosecutor’s office considers on the contrary that house arrest will allow Novikov to exert pressure on other persons involved in the case and intends to seek his detention.
According to the press service of the MIA Main Directorate in the Stavropol region, an internal check is being conducted into the police officer’s illegal actions. Based on its results, it will be decided whether Vladimir Novikov will continue his service in the internal affairs. He will also be held liable in accordance with the current legislation. His immediate superior will be brought to disciplinary responsibility.
Lawyers of Oleg Korshunov, who is charged with a large fraud in organizing the production of footwear for prisoners, do not see corpus delicti in his case. The prisoners did get their shoes, and the difference in the cost of footwear made from leather and split leather is about 10%.