The legal scrutiny surrounding Elena Blinovskaya, the founder of the Marathon of Wishes initiative, has intensified following recent court actions. In 2019, she and her team were cited for violations of the employment procedure concerning a former tax inspector who had previously interacted with a blogger during checks. Reports on the matter circulated through TASS, detailing how the episode was recorded in court documents and the ensuing administrative steps. (attribution: TASS)
During the proceedings, Blinovskaya’s attorney described the blogger’s alleged violation as inadvertent, suggesting it would be corrected promptly. Simultaneously, a TASS source indicated that Blinovskaya did not contest the imposition of the initial fine and fulfilled the payment as required by law. (attribution: TASS)
On April 27, Blinovskaya was detained on suspicions of tax evasion and money laundering, involving about 918 million rubles reported for the period from 2019 to 2021. Multiple media outlets, citing unnamed sources, reported that the blogger was detained in the Smolensk region while attempting to cross the border into Belarus. (attribution: various outlets)
Subsequently, Blinovskaya made a payment of 30 million rubles to the tax authority. According to statements voiced in court by her lawyer, a portion of the tax debt had already been settled. The authorities continued their work, with 35 foreign accounts reportedly seized in connection with the case. More than twenty witnesses or persons of interest were questioned as part of the investigation into alleged tax non-payment. (attribution: courtroom statements)
Further developments occurred when, on June 20, Elena Blinovskaya sought an extension of house arrest until July 26 as part of a criminal case initiated with her husband for non-payment of the 918 million rubles in taxes. The house arrest for the blogger was scheduled to expire on June 26, and the court records reflect ongoing procedural steps in the matter. (attribution: court records)
In related comments, there were references to prior public comments by a former public figure associated with the case, noting attempts to influence public perception while the legal process unfolded. (attribution: public statements)