Lawyer: “Evidence” of Bishop Jonathan’s guilt was created artificially

Metropolitan Jonathan and lawyer Ihor Chudovsky in court. Photo: politarena.org

The defense of Metropolitan Jonathan of Tulchyn and Bratslav, sentenced to five years in prison, filed an appeal requesting the annulment of the verdict, a re-examination of the evidence, and the closure of the case against the bishop. The bishop’s lawyer, Ihor Chudovsky, spoke about this in an interview with Pershy Kozatsky.

“We believe that there is no evidence of the Metropolitan’s guilt, and it has not been proven in the first-instance court,” he said.

According to the lawyer, SBU investigators and experts fabricated evidence against the bishop under pressure from their leadership.

“In my appeal, I raise two questions: the first is about persecution for religious views and the violation of the right to freedom of conscience, and the second is about the violation of the right to defense and the presumption of innocence. The heads of state authorities spoke out about the guilt of Bishop Jonathan even before the case was considered in court. We remember how he was 'appointed' as an FSB agent, that he allegedly 'worked' for the aggressor state. These words, spoken by top officials, were not confirmed in the court verdict, but the vertical law enforcement system worked, because when the first head of the SBU speaks of guilt, what conclusion will the expert, who is a subordinate of this head, make in the examination? And what should investigators do if they have no evidence? They should probably create it,” Chudovsky noted.

According to him, such “evidence” were three leaflets “found” on the metropolitan’s computer and in the premises of the diocesan administration. The content of each of them falls under a separate article of the Criminal Code – 109, 110 and 436.

“According to the investigation, for some reason the bishop very accurately found leaflets on the Internet with three elements of crime (to make the case more high-profile!), downloaded them to his computer, then printed them out and 'attempted' to distribute these leaflets. But the 'attempt' failed because the bishop or someone else 'lost' these leaflets in the top of a boot that was kept in the administration of the diocese. That's where they were found. It would be funny if it weren’t so bitter,” the lawyer said.

He emphasized that even the results of the examination conducted by an employee of the SBU Institute indicate evidence tampering. According to his findings, files with anti-Ukrainian leaflets "discovered" on Metropolitan Jonathan's computer were created on October 15, 2022 – four days after the search of the bishop's premises. At that time, the computer was already under the control of investigators.

The lawyer also pointed out the inconsistency of the investigation’s version that the Metropolitan allegedly printed leaflets for distribution on a printer.

“The leaflets were produced by printing, not by printer,” the defense lawyer noted.  "The question arises: where is this printer? Carry out an examination, show it to the court!”

As the UOJ reported, Metropolitan Jonathan’s defense earlier stated that the video recording of the search at the bishop’s house indicates that the security forces committed a group malfeasance – they planted fabricated anti-Ukrainian leaflets.

Read also