The scandal surrounding the
lawyers Pussy Riot: a lot of noise - and nothing
Conditionally Exempt Moscow City Court participant Pussy Riot Catherine Samutsevich may raise the issue of the status of previously deprived lawyer defending girls punk band attorneys Mark Feigin, Nicholas Polozova and Violetta Volkova said on Tuesday some media. One reason for such harsh measures lies in the fact that lawyers are not contacted with Samutsevich and allegedly refused to return her belongings - house keys, national passport and a certificate of the European Court of Human Rights. Documents required current defenders of convicted women, to "continue the fight," said the girl.
This situation would resemble the proverbial storm in a teacup, if not for two things.
First, the wide publicity of the case Pussy Riot, as usual (one might even say - home) hooliganism was elevated to almost a crime against public order that could shake the foundations of the state as a whole. What we are seeing now - a natural extension of the church-judicial investigative series, without which the whole production, obviously, would not have the slightest sense.
Second, the fact that all of the defendants of the story, saying the vernacular, finger in the pie. There is no absolutely no single party is not committed in the last year of manifest error or tactical blunders.
Some of the "perpetrators" of this scandal - the trio of lawyers Feigin-Polozov-Volkoff - now in one voice say that "in the summer of the authorities was launched propaganda campaign to discredit the defense Pussy Riot". And, they say, the current rapid exchange barbs on social networks and the media - is only one of the stages of the campaign.
However, any "campaign to discredit" always based either on facts or on speculation.
In our case, conjectures are not needed. Enough facts. Obviously, no one, including yourself lawyers today hardly rationally explain at least two things. First thing - what the lawyer took Feigin contrive this story to the registration with the assistance of his own wife in several countries, the rights to the brand Pussy Riot? The more so that at least one of the members of the collective - all the same Samutsevich - was opposed?
Second thing - why Volkov lawyer at all stages of investigation and trial hard not to notice the fact that her client Samutsevich did not participate in the dancing and singing in the church of Christ Stasitelya, and this circumstance was noted only a new quarterback condemned?
No rational kernel in the behavior itself Samutsevich. For example, the forces of a higher order prevented her worry about the fate of their own passport is not now, and not, say, a month ago? And why Catherine had the courage to refuse counsel Volkova only on the eve of the proceedings in the appeal, and not many days before?
It seems that in the current situation in the reasoned answers can not count. Each side - a truth. And it is that noisy process, at least up to the present day, all short-term rewards. Lawyers - from advertising, which is bad, as you know, it happens only if the form has an obituary. Samutsevich - for the same reason, as the noise and the discussion of de facto make it a self-newsmaker radical Left-wing, as if capable of influencing public opinion.
As for the notorious concept of ex-lawyer defendant Volkova initiate the question of depriving the former defenders of special status, seriously this time to discuss at least naive. Was not deprived of a lawyer lawyer Hasavova venerable status, open up a few months ago on TV, who, how and what will flood the capital with blood. And then - a passport ...
Conditionally Exempt Moscow City Court participant Pussy Riot Catherine Samutsevich may raise the issue of the status of previously deprived lawyer defending girls punk band attorneys Mark Feigin, Nicholas Polozova and Violetta Volkova said on Tuesday some media. One reason for such harsh measures lies in the fact that lawyers are not contacted with Samutsevich and allegedly refused to return her belongings - house keys, national passport and a certificate of the European Court of Human Rights. Documents required current defenders of convicted women, to "continue the fight," said the girl.
This situation would resemble the proverbial storm in a teacup, if not for two things.
First, the wide publicity of the case Pussy Riot, as usual (one might even say - home) hooliganism was elevated to almost a crime against public order that could shake the foundations of the state as a whole. What we are seeing now - a natural extension of the church-judicial investigative series, without which the whole production, obviously, would not have the slightest sense.
Second, the fact that all of the defendants of the story, saying the vernacular, finger in the pie. There is no absolutely no single party is not committed in the last year of manifest error or tactical blunders.
Some of the "perpetrators" of this scandal - the trio of lawyers Feigin-Polozov-Volkoff - now in one voice say that "in the summer of the authorities was launched propaganda campaign to discredit the defense Pussy Riot". And, they say, the current rapid exchange barbs on social networks and the media - is only one of the stages of the campaign.
However, any "campaign to discredit" always based either on facts or on speculation.
In our case, conjectures are not needed. Enough facts. Obviously, no one, including yourself lawyers today hardly rationally explain at least two things. First thing - what the lawyer took Feigin contrive this story to the registration with the assistance of his own wife in several countries, the rights to the brand Pussy Riot? The more so that at least one of the members of the collective - all the same Samutsevich - was opposed?
Second thing - why Volkov lawyer at all stages of investigation and trial hard not to notice the fact that her client Samutsevich did not participate in the dancing and singing in the church of Christ Stasitelya, and this circumstance was noted only a new quarterback condemned?
No rational kernel in the behavior itself Samutsevich. For example, the forces of a higher order prevented her worry about the fate of their own passport is not now, and not, say, a month ago? And why Catherine had the courage to refuse counsel Volkova only on the eve of the proceedings in the appeal, and not many days before?
It seems that in the current situation in the reasoned answers can not count. Each side - a truth. And it is that noisy process, at least up to the present day, all short-term rewards. Lawyers - from advertising, which is bad, as you know, it happens only if the form has an obituary. Samutsevich - for the same reason, as the noise and the discussion of de facto make it a self-newsmaker radical Left-wing, as if capable of influencing public opinion.
As for the notorious concept of ex-lawyer defendant Volkova initiate the question of depriving the former defenders of special status, seriously this time to discuss at least naive. Was not deprived of a lawyer lawyer Hasavova venerable status, open up a few months ago on TV, who, how and what will flood the capital with blood. And then - a passport ...
No comments:
Post a Comment