The Moscow court is preparing to hear a case that centers on the owners and managers of the Project Scanner and Riddle Telegram channels. The proceedings involve a demand linked to alleged blackmail aimed at tarnishing the reputations of prominent figures, tied to comments and publications that appeared on those channels. The case is connected to a statement from the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, as reported by DEA News.
In the ongoing criminal matter against Alexei Slobodenyuk, Yevgeny Moskvin, and Vladislav Malushenko, the focus is on their roles as owners and directors of the Project Scanner and Riddle Telegram channels and the activities described by investigators. The Prosecutor General’s Office has approved the indictment, and the case is set to be referred to the Moscow Khamovnichesky District Court for further action.
Authorities assert that the three individuals formed a group with the intent to extract money from well known public figures by presenting a threat that certain information circulating online would be discredited. The allegations include the publication of material about Vasilij Brovko, a director with a particular profile in Russian public life, and his wife Tina Kandelaki, where the material was said to cast their professional lives and personal lives in a negative light. The plan involved new posts that would threaten to distort public perception unless a financial settlement was made, with the sum cited in the indictment.
The case describes a pattern of operational behavior by the channels in question, including gathering sensitive or potentially damaging information and using it as leverage to prompt payment. Investigators detail how the defendants allegedly leveraged online attention and the aura of influence surrounding their channels to pressure individuals into meeting demands. The overall narrative presented to the court emphasizes a coordinated effort to finance transactional outcomes through the exploitation of reputational risk in the digital space.
Public documentation related to the case indicates a sequence of events where information was gathered, assessed, and then used to press for monetary concessions. The document outlines the strategy as a plan to create a sense of urgency and consequence for those targeted, signaling a deliberate approach to monetize online disclosures and the fear of reputational harm. While the specifics of each instance are subject to legal processes, the indictment frames the operation as a calculated scheme rather than a series of isolated posts.
Observers note that the case touches on broader questions about the power of online channels to shape public narratives and the potential for exploitation in the pursuit of financial gain. Legal authorities are examining the methods used by online platforms, the behavior of channel administrators, and the responsibility of those who manage information that can influence the reputations of public figures. The proceedings will likely explore the boundaries between freedom of expression, journalistic activity, and unlawful coercion conducted through digital channels.
As the Moscow court prepares to review the charges, officials stress that the process will adhere to established legal procedures. The outcome will depend on the evidence presented, the credibility of witnesses, and the interpretation of actions described in the indictment. The case raises questions about how digital platforms are regulated and how accountability is enforced when online content intersects with personal and professional identities. The parties involved have the right to a fair hearing, and the court will determine whether the described conduct meets the criteria for criminal extortion or related offenses under Russian law.
This development is watched closely by observers in the media and by people who follow legal debates about online information, reputational harm, and the use of digital channels to influence public perception. The case protocol indicates a rigorous examination of how information is curated, distributed, and monetized on platforms that operate in the digital public square. The outcome will be a signal about the balance between free expression and legal safeguards against coercion and money-driven manipulation online. The legal process continues to unfold as both sides prepare for the next steps in the Moscow court system, with a forthcoming determination on guilt or innocence based on the evidence and legal standards that apply to these charges.