Relatives of Natalia Vovk Shaban from Mariupol dispute the claim that Darya Dubina was behind the blast that damaged her car in the Moscow region. They say the accused may have been targeted for espionage rather than the explosion itself, suggesting someone else organized the hit.
The message from the Saban family indicates they were paid for spying on Daria, while insisting the car blast was carried out by others. The content also notes that the Russian state broadcaster clarified Vovk could face custody because of issues connected to her son.
Oksana Soshenko, a cousin of Natalia Vovk, recounts that after Russia began its Ukraine operation, her relative’s son was not permitted to depart from his military academy. Natalia allegedly cried for a long period, overwhelmed by the circumstances and the situation surrounding her child’s future.
According to Natalia Vovk’s father, Pavlo Vovk, his daughter served in the Ukrainian Armed Forces but left the main headquarters in the initial days of the special operation and traveled to Europe with her child. He says she lived for a time in France and Poland before returning to Ukraine.
The Vovk family asserts that Natalia did not serve with the Azov National Battalion, a group that is banned in Russia. Russian security services later identified Natalia Vovk as the person they allege orchestrated the attack on the car carrying philosopher Alexander Dugin’s daughter, Darya Dugin, arguing that Ukrainian special services were behind the plan.
Shortly after the blast, Vovk reportedly crossed the Russian border with her 12 year old daughter Sofia. Video and photographic material circulated by the FSB showed a Mini Cooper linked to Vovk with license plates from Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the Donetsk People’s Republic at different times, and images of an apartment that allegedly housed the Dugins in the same residence complex. The incident involved a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado that exploded on Mozhaisk Highway in the Moscow region on the evening of August 20 as Daria Dugina was driving home from a festival where she had spent time with her father. Dugina died at the scene and was laid to rest on August 23.
Questions surrounding Natalia Vovk’s movements, affiliations, and the timing of events continue to fuel debate among observers in both close and distant circles. The case has drawn intense scrutiny from regional media and security agencies, with authorities maintaining that all aspects of the operation were coordinated through Ukrainian intelligence channels. Meanwhile, supporters of Natalia’s family maintain that a broader conspiracy could be at play, pointing to inconsistencies in the timeline and the possibility that the bombing was executed by others who used her name as a cover. The broader mix of narratives underscores the difficulty in verifying details amid conflicting accounts and ongoing investigations.
As investigators pursue the full truth behind the incident, the focus remains on the sequence of travel, the legality of the surveillance claims, and the safety implications for individuals connected to the case. The public discourse continues to reflect a tense interplay between official statements, media reporting, and personal testimonies that color how the event is understood in different regions of the world.