Owner of Red October will be defending from Russian justice in Cyprus
Investigators initially charged Dmitry Gerasimenko with embezzlement of the VTB loan in amount of $65 million, and he is accused of embezzling the company assets in the same amount.
The owner of Volgogradsky metallurgichesky kombinat Karsny Oktyabr (Volgograd Steel plant Red October) Dmitry Gerasimenko was recently detained in Cyprus, where he came from Western Europe. According to Gerasimenko himself, he arrived in Cyprus "deliberately" in order to "attend the proceedings in the country where he can protect himself under English law."
"On arrival, I went to the police officers myself and explained that I was wanted by Interpol," told the owner of Red October to Kommersant. In court, where he was taken for decision on a preventive measure, he learned that his case on Embezzlement (part 4 of Art. 160 of the Criminal Code) was reclassified to Swindling (part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code).
It is to be recalled that the investigators of the of the Moscow MIA Main Investigative Directorate in Moscow in the spring of 2015 charged Dmitry Gerasimenko and the Deputy CEO of CJSC Torgovy dom Metallurgichesky zavod Krasny Oktyabr (Trading House Steel Plant Red October) Sergey Zatsepin with embezzlement. The investigators believe that Gerasimenko and Zatsepin could be involved in the theft of a loan in the amount of $ 65 million that has been allocated in 2007-2009 to the steel plant by VTB Bank. The money was stolen by transfer to the accounts of other legal entities. As a result, the company became bankrupt in 2012. Its equipment was sold at an auction, and on its basis the JSC Red October was established. From the very beginning, the suspects insisted on the absurdity of the charges, as Gerasimenko came to the company only in 2011, and Zatsepin in 2012. Nevertheless, the investigators insisted on article 160 of the Criminal Code. Gerasimenko, who was living in Europe, was placed on the international wanted list, and Zatsepin was detained and arrested. And just recently, the investigators of the metropolitan Police Main Investigative Directorate reclassified the charge on Swindling on an especially large scale (part 4, Art. 159 of the Criminal Code), but the amount of damage did not change. The new indictment is related to theft not of money but of property of Red October: 39 buildings, which supposedly were pledged in the form of shares.
Meanwhile, the Cyprus court released Gerasimenko on bail, the amount of which the suspect did not disclose. In addition, the court forbade the steel plant owner to leave Cyprus. By the way, on the basis of the new charges, Gerasimenko was arrested in absentia again. This allows the Russian law enforcement agencies to send additions to their request for his extradition. However, he is optimistic about the outcome of the proceedings in Cyprus, despite the fact that this country has not once extradited the Russians at the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.
As for Sergey Zatsepin, his case was reclassified to aiding in Swindling (Art. 33 and part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code), but this had no impact on his measure of restraint in the form of detention Butyrka, in he has been since April 2016. The lawyer Alexey Kirsanov, who represents Dmitry Gerasimenko’s alleged accomplice, believes that the police deliberately delay the investigation, in order to not recognize the groundlessness of his client’s charges with theft of company’s property. Kirsanov stressed that there had been a deal in which the property was only transferred from the parent company to the subsidiary, but no theft took place. In addition, the defense said the investigators had not commissioned the financial and economic expert opinions of the case to establish the value of the transferred property. The Main Directorate Police continues to equate it with the size of the loan.
It is noteworthy that in fact this is not the only discrepancy in the case. For example, in Gerasimenko’s investigative card of Interpol it says that the suspect allegedly stole not 65 million dollars calculated by the investigators, but $6.5 billion.
According to Margarita Vennberg, Ivan Rubin borrowed 40 thousand euros from businessman Vladimir Tyurenkov about a year ago. When Rubin delayed payments, Tyurenkov raised interest, and the amount of the debt increased to 70 thousand euros.