The evil term of Ivan Safronov: they don’t give so much even for murder
[ad_1]
The verdict stressed that we live in a new reality
22 years in a strict regime colony – the journalist Ivan Safronov was sentenced to such a term, who, according to the court and the investigation, handed over secret data to foreign intelligence services. This is perhaps the most severe punishment in the history of modern Russia in the case of treason.
Ivan didn’t kill anyone. By the way, in this case, he just could count on a softer term. For comparison: 12.5 years was given to the former associate professor of St. Petersburg State University Oleg Sokolov, who dismembered a graduate student, and 12 years to Muscovite Alexander Popov, who killed his wife “Miss Kuzbass-2010” (and for several months maintained the deceased’s social media accounts on her behalf).
During the verdict on Safronov, the hall exploded with applause in his support (it would be superfluous to say that no one thought to applaud either Sokolov or Popov). In general, despite the monstrous term, Ivan looked almost like a winner at the trial. As one lawyer noted: if they had given a reasonable time, this could mean that he was probably guilty after all, and since the time is so wild, then there is no faith in the verdict.
How did it happen that journalistic activity (I think after the verdict is announced, you can already call a spade a spade – Ivan, in my opinion, collected materials precisely as a journalist) is paid twice as much as for a brutal murder?
“This is the result of modern criminal law policy,” some lawyers will say. However, even in the Soviet years, crimes against the individual, and not against the state, were considered the most serious. Now, by assigning a huge term to Ivan, the authorities seem to make it clear: human life is less important than state interests. The sentence to Ivan may also be a message from the “siloviki”: the jokes are over, we already live in a different reality.
In what?
Firstly, in it a person will get the maximum out of what is possible because of his “obstinacy”. If Ivan had pleaded guilty, it would have been 12 years old (as the prosecutor promised), if he didn’t plead guilty, keep 22.
As we wrote, legal nonsense lies in the fact that the denial of guilt cannot be an aggravating circumstance, and to require a twofold increase in the term of someone who does not confess is a violation of the Constitution. But in this new reality, references to the Constitution are of little relevance.
Secondly, public opinion no longer matters. The security forces did not particularly try to prove that Ivan was guilty. They didn’t need it.
Third, “the scarier, the better.” The monstrous term for Ivan is intended to frighten, first of all, the journalistic community. And in this case, Safronov is right when he said in his last speech that his sentence is a sentence for all journalism. As much as we would like to consider these words an exaggeration.
Newspaper headline:
Evil term of Ivan Safronov
[ad_2]
Source link
