The verdict in the case involving the former governor of the Khabarovsk Territory centered on alleged attempts, orchestration, and execution of killings of businesspeople during 2004 and 2005. Former governor Sergei Furgal, along with associates Andrei Karepov, Marat Kadyrov, and Andrei Paley, appeared at the docks as the jury delivered its conclusions.
The jury foreman confirmed the panel’s verdict with a resolute, “Guilty.” He underscored that Furgal did not merit leniency or tolerance from the court.
The proceedings continue before the Lyubertsy Court, part of the Moscow District Court. The investigations cover the murders of entrepreneurs Yevgeny Zori and Oleg Bulatov in 2004–2005, as well as the attempted murder of businessman Alexander Smolsky.
The jurors concluded that not only Furgal, but all defendants except Marat Kadyrov deserved condemnation, with the possibility of indulgence considered only in Kadyrov’s case given his long battle with cancer. In 2021, the court refused permission for Kadyrov to seek treatment outside the pre-trial detention center.
Furgal challenged the verdict, saying, “Shame on you. Lift your eyes, you should be ashamed. You’re out of your mind.”
On February 6, the judge indicated that the court would discuss the consequences arising from the jury’s guilty verdict.
Under Russian law, Furgal could face a life sentence upon completion of the trial, though the statute of limitations for certain charges had already expired (as referenced in part 4 of article 78 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
Questions put to evaluators
Before the verdict, the jury addressed 35 questions in the debate hall. While the exact wording remains confidential, there is evidence that the questions were organized into four groups. Jurors were asked to determine whether a crime occurred and, if so, whether each defendant was involved as charged and whether indulgence was warranted if guilt was established.
All parties collaborated on drafting the questions, yet Furgal criticized the content, stating, “I have read the questions and it is wrong to pose inquiries that are not examined and do not appear in the indictment.” Lawyers echoed concerns about factual errors and inconsistencies with the prosecution in the inquiries.
“The questions are heavy-handed and divert the jury from the core issues,” said Boris Kozhemyakin, Furgal’s lawyer, urging the removal of extraneous details and insisting that questions be grounded in evidence reviewed during the trial.
Kozhemyakin also raised concerns about potential pressure on the jury in the draft questions and highlighted omissions. He noted that Mikhail Timofeev and Nikolai Mistryukov, not named in the draft questions, emerged during hearings as key figures—Timofeev identified as a criminal authority and Timofeevsky, leader of the organized crime group, while Mistryukov was a former business partner of Furgal who cooperated with investigators and testified against him.
Furgal’s final remarks
The day prior, Furgal delivered a closing statement to the court, urging the jury not to rely on the prosecution’s narrative and to allow due process based on the facts. The judge interrupted several times to maintain order and ensure compliance with the law.
“Your Honor, I understand everything. The jury understands everything. All I’m asking is for a chance to be heard based on the facts. The state wants to close this case—give it a fair chance. It would be a grave misstep to punish the innocent. Dear jurors, are you prepared to take on this challenge? I cannot accept that I must be destroyed,” he asserted.
Furgal also contended that prosecutors had misled the jury, arguing, “The prosecutors said, ‘We represent the state.’ Then they misled you. Prosecutors do not merely represent the state; they pursue a case against the accused, with outcomes that carry real consequences.” He maintained that no evidence had supported a guilty verdict against him and criticized the court for shifting responsibility onto the jury.
Furgal’s case overview
Sergei Furgal served as governor of the Khabarovsk Territory from September 2018 until his arrest in July 2020, after which he was detained at Lefortovo pre-trial facility in Moscow. His arrest sparked mass demonstrations across the Far East in his support, drawing large attendances and widespread attention.
The charges focus on events from 2004–2005 in the Far East, including the Khabarovsk Territory and Amur Region. Prosecutors allege Furgal, a businessman, acted as a client in the crimes, with Karepov, Paley, and Kadyrov identified as organizers and perpetrators.
The first episode concerns an assassination attempt on Amur businessman Alexander Smolsky in July 2004. During trial, prosecutors claimed Smolsky’s scrap-metal business in Progress, Amur Region, competed with Furgal’s enterprise due to high purchase prices. They asserted that Furgal demanded price equalization, and when that failed, attempts were made to blow up Smolsky with grenades. The jury also found Marat Kadyrov guilty.
The second element involves the murder of Yevgeny Zori, who was killed in the doorway of his home in 2004. Prosecutors argued the motive was control over a railway line supplying the metalworking site at the No. 2 Reinforced Concrete Products Factory. While the rail line was not owned by Furgal’s company, it was used by Zori and other parties through a third party sale.
The third case concerns the murder of Oleg Bulatov, a former employee of Furgal’s company, on January 31, 2005. Bulatov was slain near his garage, and a grenade was thrown at his residence. Investigators believe Karepov aided in organizing the assassination attempt and the murders, helping Furgal and his business associate Mistryukov navigate “special nature” problems. They also contend Karepov lured Paley and Kadyrov from Timofeevsky’s organized crime group, where Timofeev had previously led and was later placed on an international wanted list after his release from a prior sentence in 2019. The investigation links Timofeev to the broader Furgal case.