UK accuses Russian of murdering ex-KGB spy

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I said its my understanding that it happens. go check the quote. I didnt express certainty.

here, btw, is an article on UK extradition law. It does NOT list individuals extradited to Russia, but if I read it right it shows no legal block to a proper extradition request.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition_Act_2003

Still, I don't know about a single case of extradiction of any person (Russian or UK citizen) from UK to Russia.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Drogue

I'm not sure there are examples, I'm not sure you've ever charged a UK citizen with muder of a Russian citizen in Russia.

Me too, however I am absolutely sure that we charged a Russian citizen (Zakaev) with murders and provided enough proofs (testimonies of witnesses and even a video tape of the execution), but the extradition request have been rejected by the British side.

[Serb]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You see in real countries verdicts aren't decided before hand. They only decide if the evidence justifies holding someone for trial which they clearly do. If the Russian justice system wasn't so corrupt that they can't even do a proper investigation and try and hinder the proper one you'd know this.

1) The lawyer of Mr. Lugovoi said that his client never hid from the British investigators and that he (the lawer) wasn't in court (because he didn't even know that his client is charged with murder) when prosecutors came to the judge who made a verdict about arrest of his client. He thinks this situation is absurd and illegal. This happens when the prosecutor is very law on evidences.
At least the lawer says so.
2) According to Russian investigation Mr. Lugovoi is a victim (he recieved a radiation dose too), not a suspect.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Im an internet poster, speculating on some possible future happenings, not a court of law rendering a verdict. Calm down.

I'm calm

I just wanted to make you made this clear - your words are just a speculations, no more.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Serb
Me too, however I am absolutely sure that we charged a Russian citizen (Zakaev) with murders and provided enough proofs (testimonies of witnesses and even a video tape of the execution), but the extradition request have been rejected by the British side.

Originally posted by Serb
Zakaev is charged with multiply murders (including murders of Russian police officers) and he still lives in UK.

Firstly, no he isn't - Zakaev was never charged with Murder, he was charged with instigating ethnic enmity, attempted murder of a police officer, forming criminal bands and armed rebellion. Furthermore, one of the key witnesses withdrew an accusation against him, leaving the evidence on the light side.

Secondly, he was not extradited after deputies of the Duma testified that he would not receive a fair trial in Russia, along with Amnesty International. The court found that "that there was a substantial risk Mr Zakaev would be tortured or killed if he were returned to Russia." Indeed, the European Convention on Extradition requires us not to extradite anyone who might "...be prejudiced at his trial or punished, detained or restricted in his personal liberty by reason of his race, religion, nationality or political opinions." Indeed, the U.N. Committee against Torture expressed concerns regarding continuing torture and ill-treatment by Russian law enforcement officers operating in Chechnya. They had a "credible witness" who claims he implicated Zakaev in crimes while being tortured, and came to the conclusion that, given this, it's likely he would be tortured were he to return. Another snippet I found was that "Russia's own human rights ombudsman has admitted that torture is "endemic"". It's generally a badly-kept secret that Russia's huge prison population makes it easy for people to be beaten and tortured, while it not being state sponsored, and that this happens especially to Chechens.

I'd say that's some pretty good reasons not to extradite someone. Now, do you actually have an example of someone Russia have charged with a serious crime where there isn't good evidence that they'll likely be tortured were they to be extradited?

Page 19 of http://hrw.org/backgrounder/eca/turk...submission.pdf gives a good assessment. Also http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=111603 http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/07/...vnewcase.shtml and http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/AreasOfPr...documentId=784

http://www.londonfreelance.org/fl/0303gong.html

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Serb
1) The lawyer of Mr. Lugovoi said that his client never hid from the British investigators and that he (the lawer) wasn't in court (because he didn't even know that his client is charged with murder) when prosecutors came to the judge who made a verdict about arrest of his client. He thinks this situation is absurd and illegal. This happens when the prosecutor is very law on evidences.

While he never hid, the evidence seems plenty to try someone with - the trail of polonium following Lugavoi that originates at the time he met Litveneko suggests either he did the poisoning or they both drank from the poisoned teapot. Considering the same trail existed from the last time they met, I know which seems more likely. That may not be enough to convict somebody, but it's definitely enough to charge them.

[Serb]

Lugovoi didn't come to London to see the football match alone, but with his wife and kids. All of them (Lugovoi, his wife and their children) have been treated from polonium poisoning. So, yeah, this cold blooded killer assasinated his ex-buddy (btw, why?), then poisoned himself, his wife and children to provide an alibi for himself.

SOUNDS LIKE COMPLITE BULLSH!T, if you ask me.

[Drogue]

Except for the evidence linking him and only him to the time it was administered. Sure, the nature of the poison meant he himself was also poisoned, albeit less severly. But whether or not you think a man would do that, endanger his family, the evidence suggests that he did, and evidence is generally considered enough to try someone with.

It may sound like crap to you, but that doesn't make the evidence any less compelling - there was Polonium present both times he met Litvinenko, and at no other occasion. How else could this be the case unless either:

The Polonium came from Litvineko himself
There was someone else present at both meetings
Or he administered the Polonium.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Drogue
Except for the evidence linking him and only him to the time it was administered.

Sure, the nature of the poison meant he himself was also poisoned, albeit less severly.

Good point. Then tell me, why he used such dangerous and detectable way to kill Litvinenko? And why he wanted to kill him, anyway? Why put your family at danger by using a radiactive substance for murder?

But whether or not you think a man would do that, endanger his family, the evidence suggests that he did, and evidence is generally considered enough to try someone with.

What evidence? The traces of Polonium? His wife and children also have such traces. Does it mean they also participated in murder?

It may sound like crap to you, but that doesn't make the evidence any less compelling - there was Polonium present both times he met Litvinenko, and at no other occasion. How else could this be the case unless either:
The Polonium came from Litvineko himself

Who said this is not true? Litvinenko was a shady type and could very well be a smuggler of radiactive materials. His death could be just an accident nad his own fault (lack of skills and knowledge).

There was someone else present at both meetings

There were a lot of people in that restaurant.
Hm? a second meeting? What do you mean?

Or he administered the Polonium.

And his entire family was involved in his illegal activity?
Still sounds like crap.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Serb

Good point. Then tell me, why he used such dangerous and detectable way to kill Litvinenko? And why he wanted to kill him, anyway? Why put your family at danger by using a radiactive substance for murder?

Putin told him to. Seriously though even if they had a videotaped confession you'd just slip into Slaughtermeyer mode and claim it had been faked or coerced.

[Serb]

Forget it. You guys are living in your own fantasy world of stereotypes, where Russians are always guilty by definition.

I'm out of this thread.

Morons

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Serb
Good point. Then tell me, why he used such dangerous and detectable way to kill Litvinenko? And why he wanted to kill him, anyway? Why put your family at danger by using a radiactive substance for murder?

I have no idea. Why would anyone use that method? yet someone did.

Originally posted by Serb
What evidence? The traces of Polonium? His wife and children also have such traces. Does it mean they also participated in murder?

No, the traces of Polonium that followed two trails - one that echoed Litvineko's movements, and one that echoed Lugavoi's movements. That directly states that they both got poisoned at the same time. And the fact that evidence of only two trails suggests it was the two of them who got poisoned only. So either someone poisoned both of them, or one of them was the purpetrator. Considering no-one else was present at both meetings where poisoning occured, I think that's sufficient evidence to suggests one of the two of them was involved.

The evidence isn't that he himself was poisoned, it's the trail of Polonium leading away from the two meetings between them.

Originally posted by Serb
Who said this is not true? Litvinenko was a shady type and could very well be a smuggler of radiactive materials. His death could be just an accident nad his own fault (lack of skills and knowledge).

It could well be, he could have been trying to poison Lugavoi, however this seems less credible, considering Litvineko is dead and Lugavoi merely ill. This means Litvineko came into contact with far more of the Polonium. Either he was staggeringly bad at it, or he was the target. It's one hell of a mistake to ingest more of the poison than the target.

It could be true, however it doesn't diminish the evidence against Lugavoi. I'm not saying that I know of enough evidence to convict him, I don't know the full details. But even from what I know, there's plenty of evidence to try him in court.

Originally posted by Serb
There were a lot of people in that restaurant.
Hm? a second meeting? What do you mean?

They met twice. The first time they both had traces of Polonium but neither had enough to fall properly ill.

Originally posted by Serb
And his entire family was involved in his illegal activity?
Still sounds like crap.

Of course not, I never said that at all. His family got poisoned because he was poisoned, the same way parts of London were affected. However the fact that the trail starts from their meeting suggests the even that caused the poisoning happened when they met.

Originally posted by Serb
Forget it. You guys are living in your own fantasy world of stereotypes, where Russians are always guilty by definition.

I'm out of this thread.

Morons

Excuse me?! I'm the one saying it should be based on evidence. I don't think he's guilty de-facto, however I do think there's enough evidence that he should stand trial. You're the one who's stating "it's all bullcrap" without looking at the evidence. You're the one living in a fantasy world where he's automatically innocent. He deserves to be tried fairly and the court to decide if there is reasonable doubt that he committed this murder.

I have never said Lugavoi was guilty, I don't know, however there is clearly enough evidence that that should be up to a court to decide. If not in the UK, in an independent country. Stop putting words into my mouth and listen to what I'm saying.

[Serb]

My words were directed to DD and Co, not you.

I'm sorry. Don't take it personally.

Still, I'm out of this thread. I can't fight alone vs. entire western brainwashing machine.

You live in the country who gave to the world Mr. Sherlock Holmes. He always said - look for the person who benefited the most from the crime, thus you'll find a criminal (or something like that).

What motive Lugovoi had to kill his ex-buddy?

What motive KGB had to kill Litvinenko, who run away to Britain years ago and didn't know any secret info/had enough time to reveal this info?

Who benefited the most from this murder?
Putin?
Russia?
KGB?

Don't make me laugh.

KGB could eliminate that guy without a single trace. The way he was murdered, it was done to make as much traces as possible - this is not how a secret services work (though the practice of political assasination (despite Litvinenko wasn't a politician) has been abandoned by KGB in 50's, iirc, because the consequences of such assisnation would be worse than the result).

Who benefited the most from this scandal, as well as from murder of Politkovskaya?

Who said he is doing his best to worsen a Putin's image worldwide?

Who said that he is founding overthrow of the Putin's regime?

Who gained asylum in London by claiming that he could be tortured and slain by the evil dictator Putin in case of extradition?

Who used assasination of Litvinenko (and Politkovskaya) as proof of the barbarism and evil nature of the Putin regime (to secure his hideout in London)?





The answer is Boris Berezovsky.







Think, people, think. Analyze, dammit.

[DinoDoc]

Serb is a liar.

[Serb]

Cry, baby, cry

Cry me a river.