In the case of the theft of the inheritance of Alexei Batalov, a strange collapse occurred

The hearing was rescheduled due to the absence of Natalia Drozhzhina

The next hearing of the case against Mikhail Tsivin, actress Natalia Drozhzhina and notary Dmitry Bubliy ended with a predictable postponement, which, according to the prosecution, contributed to the fact that the widow and daughter of the famous actor Alexei Batalov lost their inheritance. The defendant again failed to appear at the hearing. The case has not actually moved for more than two years.

As MK previously reported, the hearing has already been postponed many times – due to a change in the lawyers of the accused (they needed to familiarize themselves with the case, which the court was informed about during the meeting), due to the absence of Natalia Drozhzhina, sometimes for other reasons. The prosecution has repeatedly pointed out that the accused and their defense lawyers deliberately delay the process.

During the last meeting on Friday, Tsivin’s defender, lawyer Makarov, recalled that the police brought Drozhzhina to the penultimate meeting. At some point, she became ill, and an ambulance was called, she was taken to intensive care. According to the lawyer, the attending physician noted that her state of health had worsened compared to that which was stated at the time of discharge.

The lawyer recalled that he had already repeatedly petitioned for the separation of her case into a separate proceeding. This time, both he and Tsivin insisted that the criminal prosecution against Drozhzhina be suspended. And on the fact that the lawyers Groza and Zvezdkin, who previously represented the interests of Drozhzhina, were removed from the case. A court-appointed defense counsel asked for a challenge and supported the defendant and his lawyer, both in terms of suspending the criminal prosecution of the former actress and in terms of removing her lawyers.

The defender of the victims and the representative of the state prosecution objected to the proposals of the accused and his lawyer. The court sided with the prosecution. The judge noted that Drozhzhina was brought to court forcibly after being discharged from the hospital due to the fact that she refused to appear at the hearing voluntarily. Also, not a single conclusion of a doctor or council was submitted to the court, which would confirm that the former actress could not attend the meetings.

Her petition to remove Groza and Zvezdkin from defense was also denied: the contract with them is still not terminated. By agreement, the challenge to the lawyer was also denied: he cannot stop participating in the process until the client so desires, and this must be documented. The judge also made a remark to lawyer Markov, who, firstly, spoke rather incorrectly, and, secondly, for the third time, in the same form, filed a petition that had previously been rejected by the court.