We see actions aimed at overcoming the norms of the law" - Lev Schlossberg* and his defenders continue to discuss the violations in his case, but the court refused to examine the case materials. "Due to daily escort to the court, Schlossberg was denied hot meals, trips and visits. It also ignored the employment of defense attorneys in other cases. There was no way to prepare for the meeting. Maliamov refused three times to challenge the appointed defense attorney, and appointed Maliamov on the day when both defense attorneys were present in agreement," said the defense attorney. The writing on the cover of the Daily Mirror, shown in the file, was impossible to read. The newspaper did not say that the teacher from Chogiev, who was injured as a result of the explosion, suffered at the hands of the Russian army - this meaning was attributed by the expert. The investigative committee found no reason to open a case, then the material was transferred to the Ministry of the Interior and the case was opened by a police investigator - according to the lawyer, this procedure blatantly violates the law. "Such a demonstrable lack of respect for human and civil rights. A verdict with so many lies. The court acted as the main prosecutor. De jure the prosecutor was the prosecution, but de facto it was the court, the judge. And we believe that such an attitude towards a person undermines the foundations of the constitutional system - not only the criminal constitutional code. Expressions addressed to me "today you want to eat, and tomorrow to wash", "about rights and freedoms in other places" - this already casts doubt on objectivity. We see actions aimed at overcoming the norms of the law," Schlossberg read his "response to the objections of the state attorney". When asked by the judge if his speech was considered pleadings, Schlossberg replied in the negative: "I use every step of the process to protect my rights." The politician's defense and he himself insisted that the appeals court itself examine the case materials. But the court saw that the request was unfounded. As a result, the court postponed the hearing due to the end of the working day.

We see actions aimed at overcoming the norms of the law" - Lev Schlossberg* and his defenders continue to discuss the violations in his case, but the court refused to examine the case materials. "Due to daily escort to the court, Schlossberg was denied hot meals, trips and visits. It also ignored the employment of defense attorneys in other cases. There was no way to prepare for the meeting. Maliamov refused three times to challenge the appointed defense attorney, and appointed Maliamov on the day when both defense attorneys were present in agreement," said the defense attorney. The writing on the cover of the Daily Mirror, shown in the file, was impossible to read. The newspaper did not say that the teacher from Chogiev, who was injured as a result of the explosion, suffered at the hands of the Russian army - this meaning was attributed by the expert. The investigative committee found no reason to open a case, then the material was transferred to the Ministry of the Interior and the case was opened by a police investigator - according to the lawyer, this procedure blatantly violates the law. "Such a demonstrable lack of respect for human and civil rights. A verdict with so many lies. The court acted as the main prosecutor. De jure the prosecutor was the prosecution, but de facto it was the court, the judge. And we believe that such an attitude towards a person undermines the foundations of the constitutional system - not only the criminal constitutional code. Expressions addressed to me "today you want to eat, and tomorrow to wash", "about rights and freedoms in other places" - this already casts doubt on objectivity. We see actions aimed at overcoming the norms of the law," Schlossberg read his "response to the objections of the state attorney". When asked by the judge if his speech was considered pleadings, Schlossberg replied in the negative: "I use every step of the process to protect my rights." The politician's defense and he himself insisted that the appeals court itself examine the case materials. But the court saw that the request was unfounded. As a result, the court postponed the hearing due to the end of the working day.