John 12.24to28

(Thank you...Please, would you ask the @admin to delete my account and if possible my posts from this account and the one I had before? If it's possible. Please know I do keep you in mind in prayer. I hope you can have peace.🌷)

"...if a friend of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if there is not, it will return to you." (I tried. I can talk to a puppet, even an abusive one, but I don't like talking to that kind of puppet. Maybe I'll be back again someday. Ciao for now.🙂) I don't see any iron, @Pudgy, only soap and masks. I can see through them, Jehovah lets me see. The ransom is enough for anyone who wants it, but I can't stay if you don't even want to try. I truly wish you well.💝 Thank you for tolerating my awkwardness.😌

I know you're really talented at multitasking, research, character development, comedy, acting, and computer related technology stuff. Some people are talented at making cookies... ...or handling matters of justice...

@Fausto Hoover et al, it seems you need a friend more than I do, lol! Jehovah will always be your friend, if you call out to Him. I'm willing to be a friend too, but it's hard to see you with all those masks on. "Search for Jehovah while he may be found. Call to him while he is near. Let the wicked man leave his way And the evil man his thoughts; Let him return to Jehovah, who will have mercy on him, To our God, for he will forgive in a large way." (Isaiah 55:6,7) "...to you, O Jehovah, I turn. For you, O Jehovah, are good and ready to forgive; You abound in loyal love for all those who call on you." (Psalm 86:4,5) ("Fausto", what are you waiting for? 🙂) 💖💞🌷✨🥰🤗💝🌱🌿

"Therefore, openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. A righteous man’s supplication has a powerful effect. E·liʹjah was a man with feelings like ours, and yet when he prayed earnestly for it not to rain, it did not rain on the land for three years and six months. Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the land produced fruit." (James 5:16-18)

"For their rock is not like our Rock, Even our enemies have understood this." (Deuteronomy 32:31) 😁

Some people try to live "the way of Faust", or something along the same lines. Others try to live "the way of Pharisees" or something along those lines. Been there, done that, both ways. If you can believe it, there is a way that is more fun... "Let the wicked man leave his way And the evil man his thoughts; Let him return to Jehovah, who will have mercy on him, To our God, for he will forgive in a large way. For my thoughts are not your thoughts, And your ways are not my ways,” declares Jehovah. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So my ways are higher than your ways And my thoughts than your thoughts." The Pharisaical way the GB describes "love" and "pure worship" and "joy" leaves out a lot of the fun. The clean joy of being young at heart and goofy and just having fun together in innocence and peace. Jesus knew how to have fun. He wasn't a stuff-shirt. He hung out with fishermen and other every-day fun people. "Lead me onto a rock that is higher than I am." (Psalm 61:2) The way to have "more fun" isn't to look down deeper into the pit of sordid behavior. It's also not to be all stuffy and sophisticated in fancy suits, banning beards and making rules about how to walk and how to talk and how to "count time". It's to recognize we're dust, be cool with it, enjoy being little, and look up to Jehovah, the Source of Love and Joyful Life... "...make my joy full by being of the same mind and having the same love..." (Philippians 2:2) When the mud is wiped out of our eyes, the view is more than superabundantly beyond all we could ask or conceive. It's not boring. It's more than what was sacrificed to get it. The joy to come is more than the selfish pleasure we give up or more than the sophisticated facade we give up. It is beyond expectation and understanding. But we have to trust Him and be willing to "take the chance" by letting go of the dungy stuff and the stuffy stuff. "Therefore, since we have these promises, beloved ones, let us cleanse ourselves of every defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. Make room for us in your hearts. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have taken advantage of no one. I do not say this to condemn you. For I have said before that you are in our hearts to die together and to live together. I have great freeness of speech toward you. I have great boasting in regard to you. I am filled with comfort; I am overflowing with joy in all our affliction." (2 Corinthians 7:1-4) "Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life." (John 14:6) Jesus is way more fun than anybody else who ever lived.

I personally don't know what Prince and Michael Jackson believed but... Maybe the GB views it as the same difference between being "eccentric" and being "an apostate"? Who really is apostate anyways, lol? JWorg believes 1914 Jesus began ruling, FDS/GB idolatry, etc other apostate teachings...crazy! Good thing the ransom is big and Jesus is patient with all of us.☺️ And that the apostate teachings have an expiration date: when Jesus gets here he'll remove them...

I don't know, James, sometimes accordians are cool... 😁

🎶"What is love? Baby don't herd me..." Lol😆

?? Ero host or Era Host or Elo hist? https://typeset.io/pdf/the-ero-host-galaxy-of-grb-020127-implications-for-the-e32fb9bi48.pdf https://era.host/en/ https://gist.github.com/Ewpratten/04d2e1b371a722b2ed33b77f57215e2b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohist (I'm thinking you meant "Elohist" right? Must have been a typo? Or...)

?? 😆 https://www.thomascook.in/places-to-visit/unusual-customs-in-new-zealand-17702 https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/zealand-sheep-protest-chants-video-sheep-respond-calls-20012015

A lot of Isaiah's prophecy is for "the final part of the days" during the 3 1/2 years of the great tribulation. During that time, Jehovah will cleanse away the apostasy from all the Christian denominations and Jehovah will guide His faithful people just like He did back in the wilderness with a pillar of smoke by day and a pillar of fire by night. "When Jehovah washes away the filth of the daughters of Zion and rinses away the bloodshed of Jerusalem from her midst by the spirit of judgment and by a spirit of burning, Jehovah will also create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over the place of her conventions a cloud and smoke by day and a bright flaming fire by night; for over all the glory there will be a shelter. And there will be a booth for shade by day from the heat, and for refuge and protection from storms and the rain." (Isaiah chapter 4) The pillar of fire/smoke is figurative. During the "wilderness" time of the coming 3 1/2 years, Jehovah will make sure His faithful ones have direction. It will not be from a corrupt organization. Jesus will make it clear at the appointed time which way to go.

Isaiah chapter 2 Watchtower likes to say this already happened, but it hasn't happened yet... "In the final part of the days, The mountain of the house of Jehovah Will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, And it will be raised up above the hills, And to it all the nations will stream. And many peoples will go and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, To the house of the God of Jacob. He will instruct us about his ways, And we will walk in his paths.” For law will go out of Zion, And the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem." We are not in the final part of the days yet. The final part of the days is during the great tribulation. All of the so-called "Christian" denominations have various levels of apostasy in their ranks. The Watchtower has doctrines that are leftover from "magic/spiritistic" practices like the 1914-numerology-pyramidology-thing, as well as other false doctrines. The worship of the GB/FDS is a form of idolatry. When Daniel was describing the dream image to Nebuchadnezzar he said "you are the head of gold". When people are worshipped, it is as if they have become "images of gold and silver." Here is what God said in Isaiah chapter 2 about such "images"... "Their land is filled with worthless gods. They bow down to the work of their own hands, To what their own fingers have made... Man’s haughtiness will be brought down, And the arrogance of men will bow low. Jehovah alone will be exalted in that day. The worthless gods will completely disappear... In that day men will take their worthless gods of silver and of gold That they had made for themselves to bow down to And throw them away to the shrewmice and to the bats, In order to enter into the holes in the rocks And into the clefts of the crags, Because of the terrifying presence of Jehovah And his majestic splendor, When he arises to make the earth tremble in terror. For your own sakes, quit trusting in mere man, Who is only the breath in his nostrils. Why should he be taken into account?" All the denominations have their "images", men who are looked to for salvation rather than Jehovah. "In the final part of the days" Jehovah will make it clear how to worship Him correctly. True worship will be refined. Jesus said so in the messages to the congregations as recorded in Revelation chapters 2 and 3. The angels of the congregations will help with the process. (The "angels" are spirit creatures, not "elders" as the Watchtower likes to teach.) "The conclusion of this system of things" hasn't happened yet. It happens during the 3 1/2 years of the great tribulation. That's when this verse will be fulfilled too... "The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the conclusion of the system of things. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness, and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be. At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. Let the one who has ears listen."

😆 (People like to overcomplicate things. Oh, well.)

There is a lot of propaganda in the "Proclaimers" book, but there is also some truth. Jehovah has always had witnesses. It's only in this past century that some people made the words "Jehovah's witnesses" into a label "Jehovah's Witnesses". There are Jehovah's witnesses in that organization, and there are also Jehovah's witnesses outside that organization. Back in the dark ages, there were Jehovah's witnesses. There are some Jehovah's witnesses who don't even know Jehovah's name. But they are His witnesses because they know God is Love, and they do the best they can with the information they have. Jehovah is not tied down to some manmade label. He's Jehovah. He's the one who tells us who is who and what is what. He doesn't need us to tell Him who His own witnesses are. "This is what Jehovah says, the Holy One of Israel, the One who formed him: “Would you question me about the things coming And command me about my sons and the works of my hands? I made the earth and created man on it. I stretched out the heavens with my own hands, And I give orders to all their army.” (Isaiah 45:11,12) When were the words of Isaiah written? Long before the 1900s. Long before 1874. "“You are my witnesses,” declares Jehovah, “Yes, my servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and have faith in me And understand that I am the same One. Before me no God was formed, And after me there has been none. I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.” “I am the One who declared and saved and made known When there was no foreign god among you. So you are my witnesses,” declares Jehovah, “and I am God. Also, I am always the same One; And no one can snatch anything out of my hand. When I act, who can prevent it?” This is what Jehovah says, your Repurchaser..." (Isaiah 43:10-14) Jehovah has had witnesses since the beginning of time. Jesus is a witness. The angels are witnesses. There have been many faithful witnesses of Jehovah in heaven and on earth. Shortly, Jehovah is going to do marvelous works, undeniable expressions of His anger against false religion, just as He did in ancient Egypt with the plagues on the false gods of that generation. Jehovah will again rescue those who love Him, and everyone with eyes in their head will know it was Jehovah who did it. In that day, many who are now "unbelievers" will turn around and bear witness to Jehovah, to His glory and praise, just like some of the ancient Egyptians did when they saw the plagues on the false gods of Egypt. Also in that day, many of those who worship the GB and other "idols" will repent and discard those "images". "One will say: “I belong to Jehovah.” Another will call himself by the name of Jacob, And yet another will write on his hand: “Belonging to Jehovah.” And he will adopt the name of Israel.’ This is what Jehovah says, The King of Israel and his Repurchaser, Jehovah of armies: ‘I am the first and I am the last. There is no God but me. Who is there like me? Let him call out and tell it and prove it to me! From the time I established the people of long ago, Let them tell both the things to come And what will yet happen. Do not be in dread, And do not become paralyzed with fear. Have I not told each of you beforehand and declared it? You are my witnesses. Is there any God but me? No, there is no other Rock; I know of none.’” All who form carved images amount to nothing, And their cherished objects will be of no benefit. As their witnesses, they see nothing and know nothing, So those who made them will be put to shame. Who would form a god or cast a metal image That can bring no benefit? Look! All his associates will be put to shame!" (Isaiah 44:5-11) Soon Jehovah is sending Jesus who will make clear what is the right and straight way of Jehovah. Jesus will gather all the "exiles", including the right-hearted exJWs and others who hunger and thirst for truth and justice. “I have raised up a man in righteousness, And I will make all his ways straight. He is the one who will build my city And set my exiles free without a price or a bribe,” says Jehovah of armies." (Isaiah 45:13) Jehovah knows who His children are. "...the solid foundation of God remains standing, having this seal, “Jehovah knows those who belong to him,” and, “Let everyone calling on the name of Jehovah renounce unrighteousness."" (2 Timothy 2:19) We are Jehovah's witnesses.

I am one of Jehovah's witnesses, and the return of Christ didn't happen in 1874 or in 1914. The stuff the org is teaching at present is wrong on that 1914 thing, but their false teaching doesn't change that Jehovah is true. They are misrepresenting Jehovah, but Jesus is going to fix that when he gets here.

The man said "as you continue to follow the direction...through his faithful slave...they will see how he is keeping you safe and secure." Yeah, they'll see it when Bethel gets attacked by the UN at the beginning of the great tribulation and the GB gets removed. That's when they'll see how foolish it is to follow men rather than follow God. That's when they'll see that the "FDS" teaching is a sham and an apostasy, and that it didn't have Jesus approval.

Here's some proof Christ didn't take the throne in 1914: he didn't get rid of the false teachings in the congregations yet. If he was king, he'd throw out those nasty "Jezebel" guy liars who keep making up stuff at headquarters and trying to pass it off as "truth". 😳🤢🤮 (I just scanned through the broadcast for the month. The GB worship makes me so sick... Instead of telling the flock to follow Jesus and Jehovah, the GB is continuing to encourage apostasy and idolatry by means of their horrid "Faithful Discreet Slave" label. They mix it in and say worshipping the GB is how to worship Jehovah. They are such liars. Here are some screenshots... I can't wait until Jesus removes the "weeds" and the "leaven"...) https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/LatestVideos/pub-jwb-104_1_VIDEO from the June 2023 Broadcast, 153rd Gilead Graduation

"...people will lay their hands on you and persecute you, handing you over to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and governors for the sake of my name. It will result in your giving a witness. Therefore, resolve in your hearts not to rehearse beforehand how to make your defense, for I will give you words and wisdom that all your opposers together will not be able to resist or dispute." (Luke 21:12-15) "...the Lord stood near me and infused power into me..." (2 Timothy 4:17) Jehovah and Jesus stand near to those who want to keep their integrity and give them the words to speak at the right time, whether it is one of our brothers keeping integrity before the judge in a Russian court or one of our brothers keeping integrity before the elders in an unfair "judicial" hearing. Jehovah and Jesus will continue to be with integrity keepers in the days ahead. What is happening in Russia is just the beginning, as we know from the scriptures. When all the religious institutions are dissolved by the UN, true worshippers will still stick to Jehovah. Many people from all religions, as well as atheists and agnostics who have a change of heart, will be gathered together by Jesus and Jehovah during the great tribulation to become one flock, worshipping Jehovah God in spirit and truth. Praise Jehovah, who makes us stand.💖 "Indeed, he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand." (Romans 14:4)

(translated from Russian to English with Apple Translate) https://jw-russia.org/docs/886.html?utm_content=sidebar "Transcript of the appeal hearing of 23.05.2019 in case No. 1-37/1 charged with Christensen D. O. in committing a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation [At the beginning of his address, Dennis Christensen touched upon several legal issues.] [...] Now, in the end, I want to express my special gratitude to those who have helped and supported me over the past 2 years of this criminal case. First of all, I want to thank my wife Irina, who from the very beginning did everything in her power to help and support me. She took care of me, gave me clothes, groceries, medicines and other things I needed in the pre-trial detention center. She supported me emotionally and spiritually with her visits and letters that I received from her every day. My dear wife, your strong faith, your great patience, your peace of mind and love for me and the truth, including your optimism, all this was a great example for me. You should know that I love you very much and that I am very proud of you! I also want to thank my family in Denmark, especially my elderly father and my sister. You should know that I miss you very much. I love you and appreciate everything you've done for me. During my stay in the pre-trial detention center, you supported me with your numerous letters and phone conversations. I am sure that you will never give up and will not lose hope that one day we will be able to get together again as a family. I also want to thank all my many friends from all over the world. You supported me with your letters, encouraging thoughts, beautiful drawings and various gifts. All this helped me understand that I'm not alone and that I have a big worldwide family. Dear friends, you should know that every letter, big or small, encouraged and strengthened me. Please don't lose heart if I don't have time to reply to your letter. I'll find you, thank you and hug you in the future, I promise it! I also want to thank the Embassy of the Kingdom of Denmark in Moscow and all its employees. You attended many court hearings and repeatedly visited me in jail. Your useful advice, guidance and encouragement mean a lot to me, and I really appreciate your support and the great help you have provided to me. I would also like to thank the Court of Appeal for being personally able to attend this court session. When I participated in other appeal cases via videoconferencing from the pre-trial detention center, it was difficult for me to hear everything that was said. I had to guess half of what was going on there. This is an unworthy way to protect. In addition, when using a conference call in a pre-trial detention center, you have to sit behind bars as if you were an animal in a zoo. I consider this unworthy, inhuman treatment today, in the 21st century. To date, I have already served in jail for almost two years, and this trial has been going on for 15 months. In order to withstand all this, not to give up and lose heart, it is imperative to have a certain inner strength. The Bible says - in the Epistle to the Philippians, chapter 4, verse 12 - that (I) "I can do everything in everything that strengthens me." In the book of the prophet Isaiah, chapter 12, in verse 2 it is written: "Behold, God is my salvation: I trust in Him and I am not afraid; for the Lord is my strength, and my singing is the Lord; and He was for salvation for me." Throughout this period, I felt that my God Jehovah was next to me and gave me the strength to withstand all this. The power not to give up, not to lose heart, to be joyful and happy and to continue to smile. I am sincerely grateful to Him for this, and I am proud to serve Him as one of his witnesses, Jehovah's Witnesses. Many people asked me how this criminal case affected me. Of course, it is not easy to be in jail for such a long period of time, to be cut off from your wife and from close contact with your family and friends. I've been living a very closed life for the last two years. You could say I existed. I spent 23 hours a day in my prison cell 3 by 6 meters, and for an hour every day I went for a walk in a walking yard, also 3 by 6 meters, albeit in the open air. During this time, I met different people with whom I had a lot of interesting conversations. And I noticed that many of them are trying to achieve a decent, honest investigation and trial. Most people feel that the system does not hear them, and I have also experienced this feeling for the past two years. I tried to support and encourage them as much as I could, because I am sure that Jesus Christ would do the same. I made a lot of new friends, some of them attended part of the court sessions, and some wrote me letters. I personally know some of them, and others don't exist yet. Some have the same faith as me, others do not, but they still support me, as they cannot tolerate the injustice that is now happening here in Russia, as someone here is trying to make Jehovah's Witnesses, civilians who love their neighbor as themselves, criminals and call them extremists. It's completely illogical and funny. Many are shocked that such things happen here in Russia, in the 21st century. Someone asks me how this criminal case affected my faith. Thanks to this criminal case, my faith has only become stronger, and I experienced what is written in the Bible, in the Epistle of James, chapter one, in verses 2 to 4: "Take with great joy, my brethren, when you fall into various temptations, knowing that the test of your faith produces patience; patience must have a perfect effect I'm still far from perfect, but I've learned to be persistent and remain joyful in trials. And the most important thing I want to emphasize is that I have come even closer to my God Jehovah and received an even more ardent desire to tell others about him and his intentions, an ardent desire to continue to preach the good news about the Kingdom of God, which is the only solution to the problems of mankind. An fervent desire to share with others the good news from the Bible about peace and eternal life here in paradise on earth to help them get closer to the Creator and help develop strong faith in him and his promises. This speech is officially called "The Last Word in Your Defense," and maybe it will be the last words you will hear from me today. Maybe this is the last court hearing in this criminal case, and it will become a point in the two-year period of my life. But I want to assure you that these are not my last words in this case about the injustice that is happening here in Russia against peaceful and completely innocent people. I've just started, and I still have a lot of things I want to tell you publicly. I'm not going to be silent, as if I'm guilty and I have something to hide. I have a clear conscience, I didn't do anything wrong, I didn't break any law of Russia and I have nothing to be ashamed of. What is being committed against me and other Witnesses here in Russia is false accusations of extremism, interrogations, detention, searches, confiscation, detection, threats, and now (and) torture. It should be a shame for that. This is, of course, a shame. The truth always becomes clear, and justice will sooner or later prevail. The Bible, in the Epistle to Galatians, chapter 6, 7, says: "Do not be deceived: God is not scolded. What a person sow will reap." The court of first instance appointed me 6 years in prison, but for what? No way. There is no evidence that I did something wrong. On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence that I enjoyed the rights granted to me under Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. I observe the law of the Russian state and I am an honest person. I am a Christian, a believer, a Jehovah's Witness, and I love the Russian people. What am I punished for? Why should I stay in prison for 6 years? No way. It's unfair. I sincerely hope that the Court of Appeal today will defend the law and make sure that justice prevails. That it is he who will stop the persecution of faith that is happening now in Russia. I really hope that this Court of Appeal will send a signal to the whole world that there is freedom of religion for all people here in Russia. In the near future, the following words will be fulfilled: "And he, God, will judge many nations, and they will forge their swords on ploughshares and their spears into sickles; the people will not lift up the sword against the people, nor will they no longer learn to fight. But everyone will sit under his own vine and under his fig tree, and no one will frighten them." Words of Micah, chapter 4, verse 3 and 4. God always judges fairly, and under his rule there will be no more disagreements, violence and wars. On the contrary, there will be peace, and there will be no worries. In other words, there will be true happiness for all mankind. Your honor, by your decision today you can take a big step in this direction, towards justice and peace. A big step towards a world without anxiety, sadness and injustice. And I hope you do that. Thank you in advance!"

(translated from Russian to English with Apple Translate) https://jw-russia.org/docs/849.html?utm_content=sidebar "Defendant Christensen D.O. (translated by Uskov A.I.) These words were said many years ago by one terrible person: "The more often the lie is repeated, the more truthful it becomes." The lies they tried to pass off as the truth then led to great trouble and harmed many innocent people. All this is already in the past and it is customary to think that educated people in the XXI century have learned to learn from history. But it seems not, these methods are again used in this trial against me and against other Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia. Again, this lie will lead to great trouble and harm many innocent people. In my case, such a lie is the claim that I allegedly continued the activities of the banned Local Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", which was declared extremist by the court, and that I allegedly used conspiracy for this purpose. This accusation has been repeated throughout the trial again and again without any evidence. That's probably how they tried to make this lie true. And the truth is that I have never had anything to do with the Local Religious Organization or as it is also called the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". Yes, I am a true believer - Jehovah's Witness. I attended various divine services with my friends, which were held by a religious group that had nothing to do with the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". And these actions were completely legal in accordance with Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. I did not continue the activities of the banned MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" and did not violate any Russian laws. I've never done anything extremist. Many people ask me: "Why are they trying to pass off Jehovah's peaceful Witnesses as extremists? And what is their "extremism"?" My answer is, "I don't know!" Jehovah's Witnesses love their neighbor as themselves. They try to benefit society. These are honest people who comply with the laws of the state and pay taxes. What is their "extremism"? I personally don't know, and during this trial I never received an answer to this question. I am accused of continuing the activities of a small legal organization consisting of about 10 members, which was declared extremist by the court. When and how did I continue the activities of this legal entity? What exactly is my extremist activity? I didn't get any answers to these questions during the trial. And do you know why? Because "it's a lie that they try to make true by repeating it over and over again"! Here in Russia, someone is trying hard to pass off Jehovah's peaceful Witnesses as extremists, but this is unfair and has nothing to do with the truth. Jehovah's Witnesses are not extremists. And do you know why? First, Jehovah's Witnesses never take up arms or participate in violent conflicts. During World War II in Germany, they refused to serve in parts of the Wehrmacht or in the German army at the cost of their lives. They did not go to the Eastern Front or kill Soviet soldiers. In the USSR, they were brutally persecuted and were called anti-communist enemies of the people. But Jehovah's Witnesses did not hate their persecutors. Nowadays, Jehovah's Witnesses have been united into the World Brotherhood, which consists of people of different nations and peoples. They live in peace and harmony with each other. And this proves that although we are all different, it is possible to overcome the differences that divide humanity. Secondly, nowhere in the world except Russia, Jehovah's Witnesses are accused of extremism. Jehovah's Witnesses operate freely and peacefully in more than 200 countries around the world. They are known as peaceful people who are completely unrelated to extremism. All of them are united by one Bible-based doctrine that encourages them to show good qualities, such as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, virtue, faith, gentleness and composure. In the Bible, these qualities are called the "fruit of the spirit", and such "fruit of spirit", or such qualities, do not create problems in society, they are not related to extremism at all, but on the contrary benefit people. Thirdly, Russian human rights experts condemn the application of the law "On Countering Extremist Activity" to Jehovah's Witnesses. And many of them say directly that this is a shame for Russia's reputation as a democratic state governed by the rule of law. These respected experts would not condemn such an application of this law if Jehovah's Witnesses really had signs of extremism. Fourthly, the international community also condemns the application of the law "On Countering Extremist Activity" to Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia. PACE calls on the Russian authorities to refrain from applying this law against Jehovah's Witnesses. The UN Human Rights Committee has repeatedly expressed concern that in Russia the law to combat extremism is directed, in particular, against Jehovah's Witnesses, and thus innocent civilians are persecuted. Jesus Christ warned his followers: "If I was persecuted, you will be persecuted" (John 15:20) As a result, he himself was convicted and killed on a false accusation of "extremism," which was a blatant injustice. But we do not live in the 1st century, and not even in the Middle Ages - we live in the XXI century, where there are human rights and freedom of religion, the rights of which all people should have equally. Is it really possible for a person to be forbidden to believe in God and imprisoned for it? I think it's wrong. This is done only in totalitarian countries, but not in legal democratic states, which, I hope, Russia is still, or at least seeks to be. During this trial, I heard that some in Russia consider extremism if someone considers their faith true and openly declares it. But this is not logical at all, since all believers believe that they have true faith. In that case, why do they continue to profess their faith if they don't think it's true? If this argument is enough to declare someone extremist, then it means that Jesus Christ is also suitable for such a definition. After all, he said to Pontius Pilate: "That's why I was born and came into the world to testify to the truth; everyone who is from the truth listens to My voice." (John 18:37) This means that the Truth exists. Jesus preached about her and taught his disciples the truth. He did not mean the truth in the broad sense of the word, but he talked about the truth - about God's plans. God's plan is mainly for Jesus, the "son of David" or his descendant, to serve as the High Priest and Ruler of the Kingdom of God. Jesus explained that the main purpose of his coming to Earth, as well as his earthly life and ministry, was to proclaim the Truth about this Kingdom. But is Jesus considered an extremist today only because he preached about the truth? Jehovah's Witnesses follow his example and also preach about the Truth that the Bible says that the Kingdom of God is the only solution to all the problems of mankind. They tell all people about what is written in the Word of God the Bible. Jesus once said in his prayer to God: "Holy them with your truth; Your word is the truth" (John 17:17). Therefore, it is very important for all people to get acquainted with this truth, which is mentioned in the Bible. This is useful and has nothing to do with extremism. It is not only Jehovah's Witnesses who appreciate the Bible. Russian scientist Mikhail Lomonosov said: "The creator gave the human race two books. In one he showed his Majesty, in the other - his will. The first is the visible world created by him... The second book is the Holy Scriptures." Without a doubt, he carefully studied the Holy Scriptures and he is right. We can learn a lot about God by watching his creations. And we learn even more about him if we read, study and explore his Word - the Bible. The Bible itself says that: "All Scripture is inspired and useful for teaching, ... for instruction in righteousness, that God's man be perfect, prepared for every good deed" (2 Timothy 3:16,17) "To every good deed"! At those Christian meetings at which I attended and participated, and which were held by a religious group that has nothing to do with the legal organization of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", we discussed exactly how we could do "good deeds" for people. Two video files of our divine services on February 19 and 26, 2017, which we viewed in court, clearly show and hear that there are no signs of extremism in them. We discussed biblical thoughts that are very useful for all people. The divine services were peaceful and joyful, peculiar to Jehovah's Witnesses. Those biblical thoughts that we discussed do not harm society, on the contrary, they bring great help and consolation to many people. For those who mourn their dead loved ones, the Bible contains great consolation: "The last enemy will be destroyed - death" (1 Corinthians 15:26). Death is an enemy for every person, but not such a terrible enemy for God. He himself promises in Isaiah 25:8 "Death will be swallowed up forever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces." Let's imagine this time! There will be no funerals or cemeteries anymore. Tears of grief will be replaced by tears of joy when God fulfills his amazing promise to resurrect the dead. Finally, countless wounds caused by death will heal. These thoughts mean a lot to me personally, as I lost a lot of people dear to me. During my stay in the pre-trial detention center, a person close to me died, who was of great importance to me - my grandmother Helga Margrethe Christensen. She was the first in my family to start studying the Bible and to witness Jehovah. She first taught the biblical truths of my father, and then me. Many people who knew her - neighbors, colleagues, her family - loved and respected her. She also loved and respected all people, regardless of their religion, nationality and skin color. She tried to help everyone and did good deeds to her neighbors. Unfortunately, someone would probably call her an "extremist" too, but most people thinking about her would have responded differently. I'm waiting for the day when God will resurrect her to life and we'll meet again. Unfortunately, I could not attend her funeral, I could not support my family at this difficult time, as I was in jail because of these ridiculous accusations of extremism. The hope from the Bible about the resurrection of the dead comforts me and assures me that I have not lost it forever, and that one day we will meet again in the cleansed earth under the rule of the Kingdom of God. If this hope helps me and comforts me, then I am sure that it can also help and comfort others. The biblical thoughts that we discussed at our meetings taught about the future paradise on earth, where there will be enough food for everyone, where there will be peace between all people. Where no one will get sick, as it is written in Isaiah's prophecy 33:24 "And none of the inhabitants will say, 'I am sick; sins will be allowed to the people living there." Is it possible to harm society by telling others about it? On the contrary, these promises can give people hope and bring joy. Indeed, Jesus himself said, "Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it" (Luke 11:28). To believe it or not is everyone's personal choice. God does not force anyone to be served. In Jeremiah 29:11 his words are written: "For only I know the intentions that I have about you, says the Lord, intentions for good, not for evil, to give you future and hope." God offers us all the best way of life - to gain a close relationship with God. Jehovah's Witnesses offer people to choose this best path, the path to close friendship with God, which will lead to eternal life. All this has nothing to do with extremism. What is my "extremist activity" and why do they want to give me 6 years in prison? I didn't act like a criminal or an extremist. I am positively characterized by my neighbors, district police officer and employees of the pre-trial detention center. Therefore, I want to ask this question once again: what is my "extremist activity" and why do they want to give me 6 years in prison? I don't understand it and I haven't been able to understand it for the last 2 years. Perhaps the Court of Appeal will be able to give specific answers to my questions, since the court of the 1st instance did not answer them to me. As I said, we live in the 21st century, not the Middle Ages. Humanity has made some progress. But it is very sad that in Russia people are again persecuted only for their faith, and even tortured for faith. February 15, 2019 The Investigative Committee in Surgut during the interrogation of 7 Jehovah's Witnesses used torture against them to get the answers they wanted to hear. Believers were not allowed to use Article 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in order not to testify against themselves and their loved ones. Although this article of the Constitution applies equally to all people in Russia. They were put on their knees with their hands raised, blows to the head and body, humiliated on national and religious grounds, put bags on their heads, tied them around their neck with tape so that there was no air access, hand behind their backs, as well as legs with tape. They were shouted at and forced to testify. Some of them felt the proximity of death several times, lost consciousness due to suffocation. Then they were poured with water and beaten with stun guns. All this has been carefully recorded through the examination, but so far no criminal case has been initiated against the Investigative Committee. Responsible persons simply close their eyes or claim that believers have harmed themselves. But it's just ridiculous! It's a vile lie! All this is a stain of shame on the history of modern Russia and I hope that those responsible for this case will be convicted and punished. Is it possible to do this to other people? Using the same terrible sadistic methods that Hitler and Stalin used? I really hope that's not the case. I sincerely hope that this was a mistake that will be corrected soon! The verdict of the court of the 1st instance states: "Continuation of the activities of a religious association, in respect of which the court made an enforceable decision on liquidation, in connection with the implementation of extremist activities, is in itself an illegal criminal act, an extremist orientation." All this is understandable. But how does it have to do with me and what does it have to do with me? All this has nothing to do with me at all and I have nothing to do with it! I have never had anything to do with the Local Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" and did not continue their activities in any way. All my actions were related to my Christian life in a religious group, which had nothing to do with the legal organization - the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". All my actions were legal and in accordance with Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. I have never regarded my actions as a continuation of the illegal activities of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". In one of my telephone conversations, which we also heard in court, I told my friend: "We are a religious group, we are not associated with the MRO or the Management Center." The court of the 1st instance did not pay attention to this at all and, on the contrary, used the false testimony of the hidden witness A.P. Ermolov, who is an agent of the FSB. The Court of Appeal can make sure that A.P. Ermolov is a citizen Oleg Gennadyevich Kurdyumov. At first, Oleg Kurdyumov in his testimony to the investigator says that he knows nothing and uses Article 51 of the Constitution of Russia. And the next day he also gives other testimony, using his pseudonym Ermolov A.P. and later he also gives testimony under his pseudonym. When we viewed two video files of our Christian divine services of February 19 and 26, 2017, which had nothing to do with the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", it was clear that it was he, Oleg Kurdyumov, who secretly filmed and recorded these services. It was funny to see how clearly the camera was fixed on it - the camera moved when he was moving, and it was clearly heard how he seemed when approached: "Hello, my name is Oleg." This means that at first he works as a hidden agent for the FSB, shoots and records our services. And then he appears under his real name and declares that he knows nothing. The next day, he already says lies using his pseudonym. The lies he repeats again at the trial as a hidden witness. Is that fair? By law, FSB agents do not have the right to secretly testify at the trial. But the prosecution, the prosecutor's office and the judge of first instance simply turned a blind eye to it and allowed him to give false testimony. And now this testimony is being used against me. I don't understand at all how the court of first instance could have allowed this. It is no longer clear to me as the side of the prosecution - the prosecutor's office could have allowed all this. They also had to guarantee compliance with all Russian laws, and in no case prevent their violation. But they allowed this to happen by simply turning a blind eye to it. I ask the Court of Appeal to understand me correctly. I have nothing against these people personally. I'm sure they are good and pleasant people with whom I will be happy to drink a cup of coffee in the future and we will laugh at all this. But I'm not satisfied with the quality of their work, as it is at a very low level and to put it mildly, it's just terrible. I understand that it was very profitable for the court of first instance to use such a hidden false witness who is an FSB agent. Since such a hidden witness has no conscience and can calmly lie and distort the truth, and tell the court everything to condemn me. Such a witness cannot be trusted and cannot be a reliable source of information. And it can't be right to use such false witnesses to send innocent people to prison About 2 years ago, I told the court at one of the many court sessions to extend my detention in the pre-trial detention center: "I ask you to give me back my life!" And I'm still asking for it! As for my imprisonment in a pre-trial detention center, I feel that they just want to hide me from society and condemn me. Isolate me from public attention so as not to make too much noise around this trial. In fact, I consider my permanent detention in a pre-trial detention center illegal and inhuman. It has a goal - not to give me the opportunity to protect myself qualitatively or so that I cannot publicly cover my view of what is happening to the media. But such a time will definitely come! Yes, I want you to give me back my life, so that I can live peacefully and peacefully again in this beautiful city with my wife Irina. I haven't had my own life for almost 2 years. I lived a life that others chose for me. The FSB denigated me and threw dirt on my honest name. They forged documents and examinations, used false and hidden witnesses against me who lied at the trial. They did all this to make a peaceful believer an extremist who is dangerous to the people around them and to Russian national security. In fact, these are funny and ridiculous accusations. It is sad that the court of first instance supported these accusations and ignored the facts. But, dear judge, please stop this misunderstanding and establish the truth. Please: "Give me back my life!" As I said 3 months ago in the court of 1st instance: "The only decision in this trial with which I will agree is justification, release, apology and compensation. I don't agree to less!" And I still think so. Any other decision will be unfair, and I will appeal it further to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and there I will certainly win this case. After that, the European Court of Human Rights and other people around the world, and, of course, many high-ranking officials in Russia, including Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, will be surprised and wonder why the court in Orel could not see what is so clear to everyone that this trial against me is based on lies that they are trying to make true, repeating it again and Do you always have to go so long a long way to achieve justice? If the Court of Appeal today considers that this is necessary, I am pleased to inform you and all those present today and those who are watching this court session: "I am ready for this!" I won't give up because I'm sure I'm not to blame for these accusations and that the truth is on my side. I'm not afraid to be sent further to the correctional colony, although it will be a completely unfair decision. I'm not afraid or worried, I feel inner peace and quiet. Jehovah my God will never leave me and I already see the fulfillment of these beautiful words: The Almighty is just, He won't forget my work of love. My father is so close to me, I'm not alone with God. My God is a reliable Shepherd, I'll find peace in his hands. Jehovah is my Protector, Father and Friend. I have everything, thank you for listening to me!"

(translated from Russian to English with Apple Translate) https://jw-russia.org/docs/742.html?utm_content=sidebar "To the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Oryol Regional Court 302040, g. Orel, Krasnoarmeyskaya St., d. 6 Through the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagles Defender Krasnikova I.A. Defender Bogdanov A.N. In the interests of convicted Christensen D.O. Criminal case No. 1 - 2/2019 Judge Rudnev A.N. ADDITIONAL APPEALS COMPLAINTIPULATE On the court verdict of February 6, 2019. Circumstances of the case Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagle, consisting of Judge A.N. Rudnev, issued a verdict of February 6, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the verdict, sentence of February 6, 2019), by which D.O. Christensen was found guilty of committing a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the imposition of a sentence of six years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a general-regime correctional colony. On February 18, 2019, the defense filed an appeal against the court verdict. In connection with full familiarization with the minutes of the court session on the basis of Part 4 of Art. 389.8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation consider it necessary to file an additional appeal. Inconsistency of the court's conclusions set out in the verdict with the actual circumstances of the criminal case Incorrect assessment of testimony The court referred to the testimony of witnesses Kiryushina T.A., Rannev M.V., "Ermolova A.P.", Chirikova A.A., Romanova G.A., Chernetsova E.A. and Banshchikova V.I. as confirmation of "the fact of Kristensenen's However, none of the listed witnesses gave such testimony. T.A. Kiryushina's testimony refers to the events before December 6, 2015, as she herself explained during the interrogation and therefore cannot establish any facts in relation to the sane period of "criminal activity" from October 18, 2016 to May 25, 2017. Among other things, to the court's question: "Does the circumstances you reported relate to the period until October 2016?" - witness T.A. Kiryushina showed the court: "Yes" (vol. 18, p.d. 108, turnover; see also comments on the minutes of the court session in terms of the court session of April 24, 2018). Despite this important circumstance confirming the complete irrelevance of the testimony of T.A. Kiryushina on the time interval, the court still put it as the basis of the sentence. District Commissioner Rannev M.V., interrogated as a witness, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Can you distinguish the events on Zheleznodorozhnaya Street, the events held by the local religious organization and the events of a group of believers?" - witness M.V. Rannev showed the court: "P 117). In connection with this answer, the logic of the court becomes unclear, namely: how in the verdict it is possible to indicate "confirmation of Christensen D.O.'s involvement in the activities of the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", with reference to the testimony of witness M.V. Rannev, if the latter is unable to The bias of the court in assessing M.V. Rannev's testimony is also visible from the following answers of this witness. To the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Kning about the ban of a legal entity, how did you determine for yourself? Religion is prohibited?" - witness M.V. Rannev showed the court: "The activities of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle" are prohibited. But people explained that they do not belong to this organization, but are followers of this religion." And further: to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Did you not stop the divine services that took place after liquidation, since you believed that religion was not prohibited?" - witness Rannev M.V. showed the court: Official duties do not allow me to conduct ORM. Citizens explained that they are not members of the MRO. But this does not mean that if they used to be a member of this organization, they cannot continue to profess this faith" (V. 18, ll.d. 117, turnover). In fact, M.V. Rannev completely withstuded himself from the qualification of the actions of the defendant and other faithful Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow. Eagle as the activity of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". Despite this, the court drew the opposite conclusion in the verdict. Particular attention should be paid to the court's assessment of the testimony of the witness "Yermolov A.P.", whose information about whose identity was "kept secret". According to the meaning of Art. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the European Convention), as identified in the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECHR) of 23.04.1997 in the case of Van Mechelen and Others v. (complaints Nos Nos. 21363/93, 21364/ Recognizing D.O. Christensen guilty of "organizing the activities of an extremist organization", the court relied on the following facts allegedly established by it: "D.O. Christensen was a spiritual leader" and "represented as the head of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" (pp. 2 and In this case, the court actually implied only the testimony of the witness "Ermolov A.P.", since only when reproducing the testimony of this person in the verdict the court indicated: "Ermolov A.P. ... met Christensen D.O. in 2015, who introduced himself to him as the head of the MRO of Jehovah Firstly, this conclusion does not correspond to the actual data of "Yermolov A.P." According to the minutes of the court session (Vol. 18, l.d. 155) to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Do you know the defendant Christensen?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "I have known him since the end of 2015. He was presented to me as the leader of Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle." Thus, the witness did not speak on the defendant as the head of the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". Secondly, the entire interrogation of "Ermolov A.P." on May 30, 2018 was accompanied by constant interference in the sound transmission by special equipment[1] of his voice to the participants of the process, including the secretary and the court. In this regard, all the testimony of "Ermolov A.P." recorded in the minutes of the court session on May 30, 2018 are the guesses of the secretary and his interpretation, made from fragments of the witness's phrases. This is confirmed, among other things, by the minutes of the court session (Vol. 18, l.d. 155): "Lawyer A.N. Bogdanov said: "The quality of audio communication does not allow you to truly perceive the information"; At 1:00 p.m., the court ruled: "To declare a break before 10 hours 30 The relevant facts are also recorded in the comments on the minutes of the court session since May 30, 2018. Thirdly, "Ermolov A.P." was unable to explain what it is - "the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". So, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "What do you mean by "member of the organization"?" witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "A member of the organization is the one who regularly attended meetings." To the subsequent question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Do you mean the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle?", - witness A.P. Ermolov showed the court: "Those who lived in the city of Orel and attended these meetings, they were members." To the clarifying question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Everyone who lived in the city of Orel and attended these meetings, are members of the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle?" - witness Ermolov A.P. showed the court: "Yes." (Vol. 18, l.d. 160, turnover). Also to the question of the court: "Did you hear the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses of the Eagle from anyone present?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "No" (Vol. 18, l.d. 164). The logic of "Ermolov A.P." is most clearly traced in the following segment: "On the question of the court: "Why do you think that the meeting on Zheleznodorozhnaya St., 50 belongs to the MRO, which was liquidated?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed to the court: "Beca 164). Consequently, for "A.P. Yermolov" the concepts of "persons professing the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses" and the liquidated local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" are completely identical and it makes no distinction between them. In such a situation, for A.P. Yermolov, any Jehovah's Witness of the city of Oryol was a member of an extremist organization. In this regard, his testimony about Christensen D.O. and "his role in the organization" cannot have any evidentiary force, as the witness found an inability to differentiate such concepts as the "religion of Jehovah's Witnesses" and the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". A good analysis of the testimony of the witness "Ermolov A.P." is presented in the debate of defender Krasnikova I.A. In particular, the attention of the court of first instance was drawn to the following: "I did not testify on many counts (organization of storage of literature in electronic form; distribution and receipt of extremist literature; organization of sermons; collection of funds). On a number of circumstances of the criminal case, he said: "I don't know, I haven't seen it, I can't name it." Thus, to the question "who determined the speaker at the divine services" there was an answer: "I do not know"; to the question about the dissemination of literature - "I can not name specific names"; on the issue of blood transfusion - "Kristensen did not say anything about this"; to the question about who accepted new members of the organization - "I do not know Made a decision on who to become a member of the local organization? And what do you know about it?" - "This information is unknown to me"; when asked about the presence or absence of extremist literature at divine services: "I did not have the opportunity to compare the literature I saw with the list of prohibited extremist literature"; to the prosecutor's question: "Did Kristen distribute literature to those who came?" Witness: "No"; to the question of protection: "did you check the contents of the tablets used by persons who visited the divine services of Jehovah's Witnesses?" - the witness "did not check"; to the question of protection: "the source of my awareness that donations were transferred by non-cash transfers from individuals" - witness: "I do A number of information reported by the witness is based on assumptions: "young people were on duty at the door, apparently determined by him (Christensen)." Often the witness contradicted himself. At first, he talked about strict documentation in the "organization", about the duties of the elder, initiators in St. Petersburg and even about Melnik as an official leader. Then he stated: "I did not see the document that enshrines the duties of the elders, I can not name the literature in which they were allegedly written; the organization is closed, I was not at a high level of trust; after the services, I mostly left immediately, I do not know what happened after I left; I did not specifically overheard what the Yes, and how can a witness know the organizational details that he tried to tell us if he, like others, came to the meeting out of interest in doctrine, and we saw what they were talking about at the divine services. We saw what was written in the literature. All testimony is based on the witness's misunderstanding of very important things. Thus, the witness for himself derived the criterion by which a person can be attributed to a member of the MRO (on the question of protection: "is the criterion of attribution to attending meetings? Is that what you personally defined for yourself?" the witness says, "That's right." There were also outright lies. About Prikhodko and Skrynnikov, he said that they were more active, made speeches, maintained order in the hall, assisted Christensen, he repeatedly noticed them at the gate. At the same time, the witness said that he "visited one of the three meetings." And when asked by the defense, does he know that Christensen and Skrynnikov attended different meetings in the city of Orel?" - witness: "I don't know that." V.I. Banshchikov's witness, who attended one meeting with the defendant, in relation to the presence of Prikhodko and Skrynnikov at such services, replied: "I haven't seen it for 7 years." It is also important to draw attention to the fact of unmotivated refusal by the court to satisfy the request of the defense for the disclosure of authentic data on the identity of the witness "Ermolov A.P." (Vol. 14, p.d. 101 - 103). Despite the absence of those listed in Part 5 of Art. 278 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation grounds for keeping secret the original data on the identity of the witness (threats to him, his relatives or his property), as well as the fact of interrogation of "Ermolov A.P." on November 10, 2017 under his real name - O.G. Kurdyumov (Vol. 10 Thus, the court violated Art. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms without ensuring a fair trial. Witness A.A. Chirikov never mentioned the words of the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" in his testimony. At the same time, when asked by lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "Do you understand the difference between a religious group, religious organization, religious association?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I understand the division between them by number" (V. 18, l.d. 134), - which allows to establish a complete lack of understanding Therefore, the court's conclusion on page 7 of the verdict is untenable: "On the fact that after the ban by the court of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" in the building at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., their meetings continued to be held regularly, witness A.A. Chirikov, who lives next to this building, also indicated in court. The said witness simply did not give such testimony. Everything reported by A.A. Chirikov to the court was reduced to the actions of D.O. Christensen near the household gate at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. in the city of Orel, because by his own admission he was never inside the building, and only occasionally passed by. So, to the question of the court: "Shortly before May 2017, did you see that the defendant met people near the gate?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "Yes, after October 2016 I saw it." To the question of the court: "Defendant also met and saw off people?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I saw him communicate with people on the street in front of this building." When asked by the court: "Among the people who cleaned the territory, did you see Christensen?" witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I saw him at the time of cleaning." At the same time, to the question of the court: "Who led the persons who cleaned the territory?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I don't know" (vol. 18, p.d. 134, turnover). Surprisingly, it was on the basis of such testimony about Christensen D.O.'s communication with people on the street and cleaning the territory that the court concluded no less about Christensen's leadership of D.O. by an extremist organization, as if any of the witness listed was a real public danger. At the same time, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "How do you explain by what signs you determined that a group of people was under the leadership of Christensen?" - witness Chirikov A.A. showed the court: "Because people were doing something, and he walked and this is my inner conviction on observations." In fact, such testimony of A.A. Chirikov was just his assumptions and had no evidentiary value for the case. This can be seen from the following fragment of the interrogation: to the question of lawyer Krasnikova I.A.: "Is this your assumption that Christensen led the process?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "Yes" (vol. 18, l.d. 133, turnover). The testimony of witness Romanova G.A. was fully reduced to the circumstances of the divine services of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Orel at Zheleznodorozhnaya St., d. 50. At the same time, the witness never informed the court (as well as at the preliminary investigation) that such services were conducted by the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". With regard to D.O. Christensen, Romanov's witness G.A. showed to the court: "Christensen was the same "brother" as everyone else" (vol. 18, l.d. 110, turnover). Also, when asked by lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Can you say that Christensen went on stage or was near the gate more often than others?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "No, he was like everyone else. He didn't stand out." To an additional question from V.Yu. Zhenkov's lawyer: "During the divine service, did Christensen have a special role?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "No, she had no special role." To the subsequent question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Did you consider Christensen the main one among Jehovah's witnesses in Orel?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "I didn't count. The brothers are all equal." (vol. 18, p.d. 111, turnover). The court also distorted the testimony of witness Chernetsova E.A. On page 8 of the verdict, the testimony is reproduced as follows: "She attended the Central meeting, which was held by the defendant" and "At the meetings she heard that only Christensen D.O. was called an elder and no one else." In fact, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "How did the service go?" - witness E.A. Chernetsov showed the court: "One of the "brothers" came out and we studied the Bible, explained the poems. We had unprohibited brochures. Sometimes Christensen performed" (t. 18, d.d. 126). Further, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Was Christensen an elder?" - E.A. Chernetsov's witness showed the court: "Someone told me that Christensen was an elder, but I don't remember who said it and whether it was true. I don't remember when I met Christensen." Thus, the witness reported "Christensen's speech" and not his divine services. In addition, as can be seen from E.A. Chernetsova's answer, she did not say that the only elder was Christensen D.O. and no one else. At first glance, the circumstances of reproducing the testimony of E.A. Chernetsova in the sentence are not so significant, since D.O. Christensen directly recognized himself as the elder of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, the witness did not talk about the defendant as the only elder of the city. Eagle. In view of the fact that the court reduced all the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in the mentioned city to only one person - the defendant - such distortions negatively affected the validity of the sentence. Similarly, the testimony of witness Banshchikova V.I. On pages 8 and 9 of the verdict, the court pointed out in relation to the testimony of the witness: "I knew that he was the elder of the assembly who knew the Bible better than others, and she turned to him for clarification" and "Knows that the defendant came to the "Hall of the Kingdom" before others and cleared the territory." In fact, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Have Christensen been asked for advice?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "Yes, and he helped me with advice." To the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Why did you turn to him for advice?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I could turn to anyone." Thus, the "appeal for advice" was not something out of the ordinary and did not indicate any "special role" of the defendant. Also to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Did Kristenen help to do the cleaning?" - Banshchikov's witness V.I. showed the court: "Yes, he sometimes came earlier and removed snow from the path so that we could pass." However, the court reproduced the words "sometimes came earlier" in the sentence as permanent actions. Such distortions are all the more surprising, since Christensen D.O.'s actions in cleaning the territory, associated with an earlier appearance near the household, do not form signs of any extremist activity (vol. 18, p.d. 137, turnover). At the same time, the court pointed out in the verdict: "However, testifying at the preliminary investigation as a witness, V.I. Banshchikova did not deny her awareness of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", and referred to the fact that at the address: Orel, Zheleznodorozhnaya St., 50 divine services of this local religious organization were held at meetings (volume No. 9, h.d. 136-138). At the same time, as stated in the verdict "assessing the contradictions in the testimony of witness V.I. Banshchikova, given in court and at the preliminary investigation in terms of her attendance at the meetings of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", the court attaches evidentiary importance to the latter (vol Unfortunately, the court did not provide in the verdict the explanation of such "contradictions" given by the witness in the court session. At the same time, to the question of lawyer A.N. Bogdanov about the testimony at the investigation: "Do you confirm these testimony?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "No, I didn't answer like that. When employee Polyakov wrote that he was an elder, I said that Christensen did not tell me personally that he was an elder. I didn't know that I had the right to make the inscription "my words are not written correctly." When Polyakov asked about 25.05.2017, I thought, he was talking about worship. I didn't feel well that day. I wrote that I have no statements or comments to the protocol, as I did not know that comments could be made." To the clarifying question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N. according to the testimony at the investigation: "To the question "for what reasons were you in the building at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St.?" You gave the answer "The purpose of my visit was the divine service of the MRO "Witnesses of Jehovah's Eagle"?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "No, I said I was at the divine service. I don't know what a local religious organization is" (vol. 18, lt.d. 143, turnover). The fact that the entire protocol of the interrogation of V.I. Banshchikova during the investigation is entirely the work of FSB operative M.S. Polyakov and does not contain the words of the witness himself can be seen from the following fragment. In court, when asked by lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "At the time of interrogation, on 29.06.2017 did you know the full name of the defendant?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I knew his name was Dennis." To the clarifying question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N.: "Polyakov wrote down your answer: "The old man of the meeting was Christensen D.O." Can you explain what "D.O." is?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I don't know it and I can't explain it." The specificity of this court case is the participation of a foreign citizen who does not have a patronymic. D.O. Christensen is Dennis Ole Christensen, where the word "Ole" is not a patronymic, but a second name. In the court, Banshchikova V.I. explained: she knows the defendant as "Christensen Dennis", and she did not know his second name. Accordingly, the mention of the full name, including the "second name" (D.O. Christensen), in the interrogation protocol at the investigation refutes the recording of the words of the witness himself. Instead, FSB operative M.S. Polyakov recorded V.I. Banshchikova's answers in the interpretation he needed. The court of first instance ignored such significant circumstances and did not evaluate them. Instead, he hastened to take as a basis the "testimony" of V.A. Banshchikova on the investigation, as they were more convenient for conviction. In the verdict, the court did not take into account, assessing the testimony of witness Gavrikov E.A., that the latter never personally communicated with the defendant and all the information reported to him about the defendant is allegedly known to him from the words of his mother, Zinaida Mikhailovna Gavrikova. At the same time, according to the interrogation protocol of Z.M. Gavrikova in the case materials, the latter refused to answer all the questions of the investigation, citing Art. 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (t. 9, h.d. 235 - 237). The prosecution party and the court in violation of Part 1 of Art. 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the testimony of E.A. Gavrikov was not checked for reliability by interrogating the person from whose alleged words the witness knows the reported information - Gavrikova Z.M. At the same time, to the question of lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "By organization and sect you mean all Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow. Eagle?" - witness Gavrikov E.A. showed the court: "Yes." To the subsequent question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N.: "Do you understand the difference between a religious association, a religious organization and a religious group?" - witness Gavrikov E.A. showed the court: "I can't explain" (V. 18, etc. 120). From the interrogation protocol, the testimony of a witness on the issue of Their understanding of the word "organization": "Just don't invent, tell me. Do you understand, don't you understand? If you understand what you mean by that?" to which E.A. Gavrikov was given the following answer: "There is such, I don't know, invented, Jehovah, God, in whom these people will believe." To the clarifying question of protection "Do you mean this by this word?" And the answer of witness Gavrikov E.A. sounded: "Yes, I understand that." These circumstances are given in the comments to the minutes of the court session in relation to May 14, 2018. It is also important to note that the testimony of E.A. Gavrikov cited by the court in the verdict, according to which allegedly "After the liquidation of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" he told her (mother) that it was no longer possible to attend their meetings and she could be brought to justice. To this she had a prepared response to law enforcement officers in case of detention that the event she attended was not a meeting of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", but a meeting of individual followers of the creed" - was given by a witness at the investigation and was not announced in the court session. Thus, according to the minutes of the court session, the court (vol. 18, p.d. 121, turnover) read the testimony of witness E.A. Gavrikov, contained in volume 9 on l.d. 241, i.e. not in cavity, but in part. At the same time, the mentioned testimony "that the event she attends is not a meeting of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", but a meeting of individual followers of the doctrine" is contained in volume 9 on the sheet of case 242, which was not disclosed during the judicial investigation. Distortion of the content of the case materials On page 15 of the verdict, the court indicated: "In addition, during the search on 25.05.2017 at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., an Instruction entitled "Procedure for serving at the gate and negotiations" was found and seized in the defendant's folder, which instructs Jehovah's Witnesses, including those on duty at the entrance, in the lobby before and after meetings, to answer questions from the authorities about the voluntariness of 84-102, 103-167)." In fact, a notebook with records named by the court "Instruction "Procedure for serving at the gate and negotiations" was found not in the folder of the defendant Christensen D.O., but in Leiba Yu.S., as follows from the protocol of inspection of objects (documents) of June 7, 2017 - v. 4 hp. 112. Such "instructions" in the defendant's folder seized during the search on 25.05.2017 at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., not found - v. 4, h.d. 103 - 108. In addition, the objects themselves seized from Christensen D.O. during the searches as at: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., and in the defendant's home itself (Orel, Instrumentation, 42, apt. 39) - were not investigated by the parties and the court during court sessions. Accordingly, the court violated the requirements of Part 3 of Art. 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, according to which the court verdict can be based only on the evidence that was examined in the court session. In any case, handwritten notes in a notebook seized from Leiba Yu.S., according to which "There is no MRO in the hall. The divine service is just taking place," - only confirm the position of the defense on the inattactivity of divine services at the address: g. Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. to the activities of a local religious organization. It is necessary to adhere exclusively to the accusatory bias in assessing evidence in order to consider such records a continuation of the activities of the liquidated local religious organization, and not to recognize them as what they really are - written notes of a person who understands the situation and realizes the complete non-participation of the actions of believers in the activities of a local According to the protocol of inspection of objects (documents) of June 7, 2017 (t. 4, p.d. 108 - 110), cleaning schedules, weekly plans for meetings from 08.05.2017 to 04.06.2017, lists of persons on duty at the gate of the household fence, the front door of the "Hard of the Kingdom" and in the foyer before and after Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. is freely available and were located on a stand in the hallway. In this regard, the seizure of similar documents directly from the defendant (page 17 of the verdict) has no evidentiary value: these documents could have any means of their accessibility. At the same time, according to the testimony of witness V.V. Melnik, who previously headed the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", the listed documents were never used in the activities of such an organization (vol. 19, p.d. 141, turnover - 143) and were not inherent in it. In this regard, the court's conclusions reflected on page 17 of the verdict are also not substantiated: "According to the protocol of the search of 25.05.2017 and the conclusions of computer and technical forensic examination No. 822/1-1 of 20.10.2017, in the task at: Year Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., various electronic media with information related to the activities of the banned organization were seized. All these "information", or rather electronic materials, were studied in court sessions and there is none among them that would be on the list of extremist materials (at least at the time of the search) or would be related to the activities of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". The court's conclusions set out on pages 17 - 18 of the verdict, according to which "During the search at the place of residence of Christensen D.O. 25.05.2017 at the address: g. Orel, 42, 39 Priborostroitelnaya St., were found and seized: ... certificates of the Centralized Regional Religious Organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" according to which he was an employee of this Center, receiving wages, lived and conducted religious activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Orel (volume 4, hp. 177-240)." Firstly, the court did not reflect in the verdict the results of the study in the court session the certificates of the Centralized Regional Religious Organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia", which cover the interval from 2006 to August 2009, which is not part of the period of "criminal" activity sane to Christensen D.O. (v 233 - 236). Secondly, the court did not give or assess the testimony of the defendant received on July 2, 2018 according to these documents (vol. 18, p.d. 176, turnover - 177). At the same time, the relevant circumstances were explained. Thus, when asked by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "During the fragment of the conversation listened to, you say that the spiritual connection between "Jehovah's Witnesses", what does it mean?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "This means that all "Jehovah's Witnesses" living in various cities All Jehovah's Witnesses, there is a spiritual connection between them, a fraternal connection. Before the management center was liquidated, some of the management center could travel to regions, different cities and maintain a conversation about the Bible, communicate with local brothers and sisters - this was a spiritual connection, or which was very rare when Jehovah's Witnesses began to preach a lot, 5 to 7 hours a day, because they wanted to tell how many more people about God's In this case, the management center could assist Jehovah's Witnesses, issue a certain amount for the purchase of food, or for any transportation costs, and this until the relevant "Jehovah's Witness" found a suitable job, or the termination of preaching work in such a large amount. Based on this, Jehovah's Witness could concentrate most of his time preaching God's kingdom. To the question of defender A.N. Bogdanov: "Personally, did you receive any money from the management center at this stage?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "Yes, I received it from about 2007 to 2009. Since 2009, I stopped receiving money because I registered myself as a private entrepreneur and started working, and no longer needed material assistance. When asked by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "In 2016, and later, did you receive any money from the management center?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "No" (vol. 18, l.d. 176, turnover - 177). Further on the text of the verdict, the court also states: "In addition, a large number (more than 820 copies) of various religious literature was found, including leaflets aimed at involving Jehovah's Witnesses in religious activities. The volume of such literature and the absence of signs of use on their packages indicate the purpose of its distribution. The court assessed the religious literature found during the search of Christensen's house D.O. despite the fact that it had never reviewed or examined it in a court session. This evidence was not presented to the prosecution to the court and therefore could not form the basis of the sentence. However, none of these publications were included in the list of extremist materials, which excludes the possibility of such literature confirming the fact of "extremist" activities. Similarly, the following court arguments cannot confirm Christensen D.O.'s involvement in any extremist activity. Receipt by the defendant by means of CMC of notifications of activation of the security alarm set at the address: g. Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. is not something prohibited by law. Moreover, this does not confirm any "special leadership role" of the defendant among the Oryol Jehovah's Witnesses. Thus, according to the case materials (V. 3, etc. 166, 177, 182, 199 and 218) Christensen received about 5 such SMS messages during the entire sane period, and three of them indicated the following plan: "USER 22," "USER 6", "USER 3". According to the explanations of the translator Uskov A.I., this word is translated as "user" and thus indicates a significant number of users of such a security alarm system: together with the defendant about 22 people. CMC messages to Grogol M.S. V.G., Maksimova V.G., Slastina M.V., Zhurbenko A.G., Terentyeva Yu.P. about duty near the gate of the "Her of the Kingdom" and in the foyer during meetings on 26.02.2017, 28.02.2017, 16.03.2017 and 06.05.2017 are also not criminal. As the defendant explained when testifying: "Indeed, the brothers and sisters stood at the gate, and the gate really closed. But there really wasn't any pass regime. It is important to take into account two points here. First, it is customary for Jehovah's Witnesses around the world to welcome their brothers and sisters who come to worship, so some brothers voluntarily come earlier at will and meet other brothers and sisters at the door. And this is not a pass regime. Secondly, the brothers at the gate have always had to monitor security, as hatred and enmity have been escalated in society towards Jehovah's Witnesses for many years, and there may have been cases of vandalism and violence, as was the case in some other cities. Believers had the right to seek help from the police or hire another security service for a fee to be on duty near the Hall of the Kingdom, guarding Jehovah's peaceful Witnesses from potential vandals and extremists, but they preferred to be on duty at the gate" (vol. 20, p.d. 68, turnover). The same testimony was given by witnesses E.A. Chernetsova and V.I. Banshchikova. The court unilaterally presents the situation with writing such SMS messages: only those messages in which the defendant asks someone to do something are given. However, the court kept silent about the presence of other kinds of SMS messages, where various kinds of requests were already addressed to Christensen D.O. Thus, on April 20, 2017, according to the protocol of inspection and listening to phonograms of June 6, 2017, D.O. Christensen's number received messages from the phone number registered on A.V. Bondarenko with the following text: "maybe let someone go to the gate", "for observation"; then from the number registered on E.G. Chern 207, 208). The above shows that all such correspondence was the usual communication of believers who knew each other well and attended peaceful services together. Subsequent court statements about Christensen D.O.'s actions, such as "instructed", "coordinated actions", "exempt from speeches at meetings", based on the "assessment" of the defendant's telephone conversations, have nothing to do with the real content of telephone conversations. The defense does not consider it necessary to focus the attention of the court of appeal on each telephone conversation mentioned by the court in its verdict in order to show an absolute discrepancy between the content of the conversation and the assessment given to it by the court. This would lead to an increase in the volume of additional appeal by dozens of pages, as this implies full reproduction of the corresponding fragments of each telephone conversation. In this regard, the defense will bring only a few of Christensen's conversations by D.O. Christensen mentioned by the court in the verdict. On page 19 of the verdict, the court writes: "At the request of Esmurziev Sh.V., Tyklev A.S., Smirnov P.S. and Bachurin A.V. exempted them from speeches at meetings, checking the accounts of meetings in connection with illness and resolved issues of their replacement by others." Let's take D.O. Christensen's conversation with the first person mentioned by the court - Sh.V. Esmurziev. Its content is set out in the protocol of inspection and listening to phonograms of 06.06.2017 (volume 3 h.d. 179-180), also in the meeting the parties listened to the audio recording file of such a conversation - "58FF6FD5.wav" (providence proof - optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UK Here is the verbatim content of the conversation: D.O. Christensen: Yes! This is Dennis Esmurziev Sh.V.: Hello! Hi, brother! Christensen D.O.: Yes, hello! Esmurziev Sh.V.: Listen, I'll tell you five seconds, I won't be able to come today, something began to feel very bad, my head hurt and doesn't go away, so I drink pills, they don't help. Christensen D.O.: Yeah Esmurziev Sh.V.: Listen, I have to read today instead of Artem. Christensen D.O.: Yeah Esmurziev Sh.V.: Can't you find someone for me? D.O. Christensen: Of course, of course. Listen, you'd better call Bachurin, he's the chairman. It is on the basis of this fragment of the conversation that the court concludes that D.O. Christensen released from his speech at the meeting Sh.V. Esmurziev. The failure of the judicial assessment is more than obvious. So, Sh.V. Esmurziev does not ask the defendant a question like: "Can I not come to the meeting-service if I'm sick?" On the contrary, the interlocutor talks about his personal decision not to come due to illness and asks Christensen D.O. to find someone in his place to "read". At the same time, D.O. Christensen does not solve this issue himself, but asks to "call Bachurin." On this telephone conversation, the defendant's testimony was received: "Ordinary telephone conversations, in which the perverts share information about their illness or other life circumstances, are also unreasonably presented by the prosecution as a kind of "leading" role on my part, during which I allegedly "allow" not to attend the divine services of the MRO. However, in fact, firstly, the file "58FF6FD5.wav" is out of MRO, and secondly, I can't allow or prohibit anyone to attend services. This is an absolutely voluntary work of every believer. The essence of our conversation was that my friend called me and asked me to find one of the brothers who could agree to read the Bible at the divine service instead of him, because he fell ill. This is quite normal, because Jehovah's Witnesses have such qualities as mutual assistance and responsibility. In the days when I couldn't attend services for some reason, I also called my co-religionists so that they wouldn't worry about me." The court ignored such a clear and logical explanation of the defendant in the verdict and did not give any assessment. The court also concludes: "V.G. Maksimov consulted with D.O. Christensen about the upcoming expenses of the meetings. The defendant, in turn, gave him instructions on when and how to dispose of the funds received from the donation in the Hall of the Kingdom. Informed him about the methods and procedure for accounting for money. He gave instructions on the destruction of documents related to monetary accounting, depending on the presence or absence of necessity. He advised on the schedule of meetings, appointed him chairman of the meeting and gave advice on drawing up speeches on them. At the same time, the court does not indicate in the verdict what kind of telephone conversations and corresponding audio recording files it means. Apparently, the court meant the audio files of telephone conversations 30551F1H.wav, 307A5760.wav, D2584621.wav, 035737EB.wav (meaning proof - optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UK15051227 1), held between the defendant and Maksimov V.G 166 - 171, 192 - 193, 196 - 197). In order to show the complete bias of the judicial assessment of such conversations, let's take one of them - dated April 1, 2017 (i.e. 3, 196 - 197): D.O. Christensen: Yes! This is Dennis. Maksimov V.G.: Hi, Dennis! Christensen D.O.: Yeah, hi! Maksimov V.G.: Listen, I was engaged in accounting here, started counting something in papers, found some incomprehensible accounts for 2016 on Oleg Gennadyevich Ivkin. Christensen D.O.: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Maksimov V.G.: So, I don't know what to do with them, destroy them or give them to anyone. To be honest, I don't even remember how I got them and what I need them for. Christensen D.O.: Yes. Maksimov V.G.: Here, I have them Christensen D.O.: Listen, while you save. Are they digital or paper? Maksimov V.G.: Paper D.O. Christensen: Yeah. Then we will discuss this issue tomorrow. Maksimov V.G.: Will I bring them tomorrow? D.O. Christensen: Yes Maksimov V.G.: Okay. D.O. Christensen: Then we'll see what it is. Maksimov V.G.: Okay. Christensen D.O.: And who gave it to you, or do you just have them? Maksimov V.G.: well, I don't know how I got them. The thing is, I don't remember what it is or what it's for. And there are a lot of them. Christensen D.O.: yes. I guess I know what it is, but I can't say for sure. Maksimov V.G.: I have a contract for emergency dispatching and rescue services. I still have an account for 40% of the cost of electricity "Orlovsky Energosbyt", and more than one account. D.O. Christensen: You know, well, that's very good. Maksimov V.G.: I have an act of work performed. Kristensen D.O.: In theory, you know, you need to discuss what's going on with Tyklev. According to the case materials (V. 1, l.d. 117 - 118) the person mentioned in the conversation, for whom the paid invoices of Maximov V.G. are issued - Oleg Gennadyevich Ivkin - is the owner of the building at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. in the city of Orel. And as follows from the context of the conversation, these accounts and acts are related to the payment of electricity, as well as emergency dispatch and rescue services of the relevant household. A reasonable question arises: what can actions to pay for utilities, rescue services have to do with crime and extremist activities, as well as a discussion on the "preservation" or "destruction" of such accounts (?). Whoever and whatever says to another person about it, all this has been and remains legitimate actions to fulfill civil obligations to utility providers. All this only emphasizes the position originally indicated by the defense in the appeal: the court of first instance distinguishes between the law and the crime on the principle of religion of the perpetrators of any actions. If in the city of Jehovah's Witnesses talk about paying for utilities, it immediately becomes a crime for the court, while the court itself pays for the same services as hundreds of thousands of other residents of the city. Eagle. But if Jehovah's Witnesses do it and it is related to the building where the divine services take place, all this immediately becomes a crime for the court. It is also worth noting the defendant's testimony on all these four telephone conversations: "In addition, I want to briefly explain those telephone conversations in which some financial issues are discussed. These are the files "30551FIH.wav", "307A5760.wav", "D2584621.wav", "035737EB.wav". These conversations were about financial audits of the accounting of those voluntary donations that were received in the boxes of the Central meeting. The dialogue did not talk about the finances of the MRO. I've never had anything to do with the funds of the MRO and I can't explain anything about it because I don't know. As for the voluntary donations of our meeting, I want to clarify the following. Aware of their responsibility to God, Jehovah's Witnesses around the world try very carefully to the accounting and expenditure of donated funds. As witnesses have repeatedly said in the court session, Jehovah's Witnesses can make voluntary donations around the world by putting money in boxes located in the places where their services are held. Jehovah's Witnesses do not have mandatory fees. In addition, donations are anonymous, so no one controls other believers on whether he made donations and, if so, in what amount. Also, there is no mandatory or predetermined amount of donations. However, the accounting of donated funds was carried out, and the funds were spent exclusively for peaceful purposes, namely the common needs of believers, such as payment of utility bills for the Hall of the Kingdom, repair and maintenance of the liturgical building, assistance to believers affected by natural disasters. The court also ignored this fact. For the same reasons, the following court conclusion is not justified: "V.V. Melnik, M.V. Slastin, A.G. Zhurbenko and I.V. Mironov were officially part of the liquidated local religious organization "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" and were its members (volume 1 hp. 124-126). The above negotiations, among other things, testify to the coordination by the defendants of their actions aimed at continuing the implementation of the Chartered goals of the religious association, in respect of which the court made a decision that has entered into force to liquidate in connection with extremist activities. The court ignored that all these persons, along with the defendant, are Jehovah's Witnesses and maintain to varying degrees of communication with each other, including on religious topics. In particular, when asked by the prosecutor about communication with Christensen, D.O., witness V.V. Melnik explained: "There was no question of any interaction, and in relation to seeing or not, I no longer remember, I did not record each meeting. We are a community of Jehovah's Witnesses, we communicate, so it is possible that we saw each other once, but it was not some planned meeting or something else" (i. 19, p.d. 172, turnover). These fragments of specific telephone conversations of the defendant clearly show the bias and partiality of the conclusions of the court of first instance. Any normal act or word committed was perceived by the court solely in accusatory bias. At the same time, the court did not give a single specific phrase from telephone conversations, mentioning only its personal perception of the speech of the interlocutors. The court's assessment of the conversation in the Country Chicken cafe between Christensen D.O. and Kurdyumov O.G. also does not correspond to the real content of such a conversation. The court writes: "during the conversation about the court's decision prohibiting the activities of the Jehovah's Witnesses, the defendant, referring to the Bible, said that God said there was no need to stop. Therefore, the work continued, because Jehovah's Witnesses must obey the law until this law contradicts God's law (volume 2 hp. 1, 2-34)." First, according to the case materials at the time of the conversation - May 16, 2017 - there were two court decisions. The first is the decision of the Oryol Regional Court of June 14, 2016 on the liquidation of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". The second is the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 20, 2017 on the liquidation of the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia", which at that time had not yet entered into force and therefore was not generally binding. In the conversation, provocateur O.G. Kurdyumov does not mention what kind of decision he means (V. 2, etc. 80): D.O. Christensen: If not, we'll get out somehow. As if they didn't stop, by no means. It can't be, we can't stop. The Bible clearly states that we must come together to strengthen each other. And it is clear that we need to preach. Since God said that, we can't stop. That would be wrong with him. Kurdyumov O.G.: Yes. And in relation to the court decision? (Laughs) Christensen D.O.: What? Kurdyumov O.G.: What about the court decision? Christensen D.O.: Look, if the Bible says very well: to whom should we obey more? People or God? O.G. Kurdyumov: God? Christensen D.O.: Yes. That's why a person can say anything. There is a very good, we can say, principle in the Bible that we must obey the laws when these laws do not contradict God's laws. This means that if they say something else, we must obey. God demands it from us. That's what we do: we pay taxes and everything else. But when something is said against the law of God, then people, man, well, he puts himself above. It's not possible. Do you understand this meaning? In this regard, the defense asked the defendant the following question in the court session of July 2, 2017 (V. 18, L.D. 182) when examining the relevant operational audio recording: "When Kurdyumov asked you about the attitude to the court decision, which court were you thinking about, he asked you?" To this question, the defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "It was about the court decision, about the closure of the management center in St. Petersburg." The honesty of this answer is also confirmed by the circumstances clarified during the court session on July 11, 2017 during a study and audition with the translation of a telephone conversation between the defendant and his father Jess Christensen of 13.05.2017: Jess Christensen: Well, how are you doing? Dennis Christensen: Things are fine. Everything here is quiet and peaceful now. Everything seemed to stop. We are waiting for an appeal against the case, an appeal against the case, the decision on the case will be made on June 13, we can be alone until June 13. Yes, that's for sure, there are small problems all around, but I have no problems, absolutely. Problems will appear only after, as it is called, after the trial." In this regard, the following statement was made by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "In order to understand what court decision we are talking about, it is necessary to restore the date of the conversation, apparently the conversation was 13.05.2017. And the appeal against the court decision, which is really relevant, is the decision of the Oryol Regional Court of 14.06.2016, its appeal took place in October 2016. In May 2017, there could be no question of appealing this decision, as it was more than six months ago. Here we are talking about: in the conversation "we were waiting for an appeal, an appeal in the case, the decision will be made on 13.06, you can be calm until June 13," that is, we are talking about a decision, the appeal of which has not yet been considered at the time of the conversation, that is, for May 2017. Of the court decisions, only one decision meets these criteria - this is the decision of 20.04.2017 on the liquidation of the legal entity Management Center "Jehovah's Witnesses of Russia". It is strange that the prosecutor says that since the interlocutors say that there will be an appeal on June 13, then they are aware of the illegality of their actions. But if the appeal, the decision has not yet entered into force, that is, there can be no legality or illegality of any actions (vol. 18, pp. 203, turnover). These circumstances are also confirmed by the card of the case on the liquidation of the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" on the website of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (https://vsrf.ru/lk/practice/cases/5414926). In particular, it refers to the court session held in such a case of June 13, 2017, during which one of the private complaints of the administrative defendant was considered. And this was the first appeal hearing in the case, albeit on a private issue. In this regard, many believers, as can be seen from the conversation between the defendant and his father, considered June 13, 2017 to be the date of the main appeal hearing to review the decision to liquidate the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia". In any case, none of these decisions imposed a ban on the confession and expression of the faith of Jehovah's Witnesses, as detailed in the main appeal. The court's arguments that by virtue of Art. 7 of the Federal Law "On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations" the head (representative) of a religious group must notify the registering body of the beginning of the activities of such a group. On this basis, on page 15 of the verdict, the court concludes: "Notifications of any religious groups of Jehovah's Witnesses about the beginning or continuation of their activities in the territory of the city of Oryol and the Oryol region did not receive the body authorized to make a decision on the state registration of a religious organization. At the same time, the court did not take into account that the relevant claim was made to this law only on July 13, 2015, and entered into force only on July 24, 2015. At the same time, according to the testimony of witnesses interrogated in the case, the religious group meeting "Central" in the city of Orel began its activities much earlier than 2015, and therefore the relevant legal provisions, as not retroactive, could not extend their effect to this religious group. In any case, the logic based on the statement "there is no notification piece of paper - there is no religious group" does not stand up to any criticism, since it is important to establish facts in the evidence in criminal proceedings, and not to focus on the presence of any notifications. In any case, if the court believes that the meeting of Jehovah's Witnesses "Central" city. The Eagle had to be "notified" of himself as a religious group, the fact of such a "violation" only confirms the existence of this group. Its actual existence cannot be made dependent on the presence of any "notifications". The assessment given by the court by the results of the ORM "Observation" of February 19 and 26, 2017 also has little to do with reality. Among other things, the court writes: "At the same time, attention was paid to strengthening faith and connection with God through the elder, whose advice should be listened to" (page 11 of the verdict). However, no such statements were made (optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UJ211255353). Similarly, at the divine service on February 26, 2017, "a lesson was not held with training in the correct and effective preaching activities of the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses." In fact, those present discussed the following: "Therefore, what else can adorn our teaching? Our appearance and the items we carry with us when we preach. It is clear that we are always clean, we always wear clean clothes, but it is also important to remember that our items that we use must also be clean... The Bible must be clean..." That's all. And this discussion was not conducted by Christensen D.O. (Optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UJ21125534 4). Here it is also important to pay attention to the distortion by the court of the results of the search on May 25, 2017 in the home of Maksimov V.G. According to page 21 of the sentence, during such a search, "electronic media and financial documents such as ... resolutions on the expenditure of funds of meetings for various needs of a local organization in the period from June 2015 to April 20, 2017 were allegedly found." In fact, neither these documents nor other case materials followed that such "resolutions" relate to the needs of a certain "local organization". At the same time, according to these documents, D.O. Christensen gave the following testimony: "The resolution is the decision of all Jehovah's Witnesses attending the divine services of a certain meeting to spend the donated money. That is, not someone specific decides on how to use donations, but all brothers and sisters together. Therefore, each resolution has the words: "FOR", "AGAINST" and "ABSTAINED", and next to them there are numbers that indicate the number of people who voted for one or the other. Therefore, it is all brothers and sisters who together decide how to use the donated money, not someone alone. The report on the verification of the accounts of the assembly is filled in on the basis of the principle from the Bible recorded in the second Epistle of the Apostle Paul Corinthians Chapter 8, verses: 20, 21. There, the Apostle Paul wrote about the need to beware of reproaches for donations and treat such donations honestly not only before God, but also before people. That is why Jehovah's Witnesses donations are made in writing. In this case, everything is obvious and honest, you can't hide something and be reproached. The purpose of such a report is to make sure that not a single ruble from the donations of brothers and sisters is lost. That is why Jehovah's Witnesses around the world - Denmark, Russia, Germany, etc. use such documents. Verification of the accounts of the meeting can be done by any Christian - Jehovah's Witness, who is trusted by brothers and sisters of the assembly. But such a "check" has nothing to do with any legal entity - organization. That is, it has nothing to do with the MRO" (vol. 20, l.d. 67, turnover, - 68). These testimony is consistent with the testimony of V.V. Melnik and is not refuted by the prosecution during the judicial investigation. On the basis of the above, and guided by Art. 28, Part 1 of Art. 49 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Articles 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 17 and 18 of the European Convention for the Protection of Rights and Freedoms, Art. 5, 7, 9, 14, 26, 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Article 24, Art. 389.15, paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Art. 389.20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Please: Cancel the sentence of the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagle of February 6, 2019, by which a citizen of the Kingdom of Denmark Christensen Dennis Ole was found guilty of committing a crime under the Kingdom of Denmark on December 18, 1972. Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Art. 389.20, Art. 389.23 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to acquittal Christensen Dennis Ole in connection with the absence of an event of a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Recognize Christensen Dennis Ole's right to rehabilitation. Investigate at the court session of the court of appeal the following evidence, which was examined by the court of first instance: Physical proof optical disc DVD-R No. PAP6 93UJ211255353 (fragments 00:09:09 − 00:11:46; 00:30:36 − 00:31:13; 00:58:34 − 01:02:42); Physical proof optical disc DVD-R No. PAP6 93UJ21125534 4 (fragments 00:33:10 - 00:33:40); Testimony of witness Azarenka P.S. in part of v. 18, l.d. 125; Testimony of witness Rannev in part of v. 18, l.d. 117 + turnover; Decision of the Soviet District Court of the city of Eagle of April 3, 2001 (Tol. 17, etc. 13 - 16); Ruling of the Oryol Regional Court of June 16, 2017 and the appeal ruling of the Oryol Regional Court of July 13, 2017 (v. 15, p.d. 197 - 198); Other evidence, the study of which will be announced in the court of appeal. We are requesting participation in the court session of the court of appeal. Sincerely, Defender Krasnikova I.A. Defender Bogdanov A.N. March 19, 2019. [1] The equipment completely changed the voice of the witness."

(translated from Russian to English with Apple Translate) https://jw-russia.org/docs/742.html?utm_content=sidebar "To the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Oryol Regional Court 302040, g. Orel, Krasnoarmeyskaya St., d. 6 Through the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagles Defender Krasnikova I.A. Defender Bogdanov A.N. In the interests of convicted Christensen D.O. Criminal case No. 1 - 2/2019 Judge Rudnev A.N. ADDITIONAL APPEALS COMPLAINTIPULATE On the court verdict of February 6, 2019. Circumstances of the case Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagle, consisting of Judge A.N. Rudnev, issued a verdict of February 6, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the verdict, sentence of February 6, 2019), by which D.O. Christensen was found guilty of committing a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the imposition of a sentence of six years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a general-regime correctional colony. On February 18, 2019, the defense filed an appeal against the court verdict. In connection with full familiarization with the minutes of the court session on the basis of Part 4 of Art. 389.8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation consider it necessary to file an additional appeal. Inconsistency of the court's conclusions set out in the verdict with the actual circumstances of the criminal case Incorrect assessment of testimony The court referred to the testimony of witnesses Kiryushina T.A., Rannev M.V., "Ermolova A.P.", Chirikova A.A., Romanova G.A., Chernetsova E.A. and Banshchikova V.I. as confirmation of "the fact of Kristensenen's However, none of the listed witnesses gave such testimony. T.A. Kiryushina's testimony refers to the events before December 6, 2015, as she herself explained during the interrogation and therefore cannot establish any facts in relation to the sane period of "criminal activity" from October 18, 2016 to May 25, 2017. Among other things, to the court's question: "Does the circumstances you reported relate to the period until October 2016?" - witness T.A. Kiryushina showed the court: "Yes" (vol. 18, p.d. 108, turnover; see also comments on the minutes of the court session in terms of the court session of April 24, 2018). Despite this important circumstance confirming the complete irrelevance of the testimony of T.A. Kiryushina on the time interval, the court still put it as the basis of the sentence. District Commissioner Rannev M.V., interrogated as a witness, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Can you distinguish the events on Zheleznodorozhnaya Street, the events held by the local religious organization and the events of a group of believers?" - witness M.V. Rannev showed the court: "P 117). In connection with this answer, the logic of the court becomes unclear, namely: how in the verdict it is possible to indicate "confirmation of Christensen D.O.'s involvement in the activities of the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", with reference to the testimony of witness M.V. Rannev, if the latter is unable to The bias of the court in assessing M.V. Rannev's testimony is also visible from the following answers of this witness. To the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Kning about the ban of a legal entity, how did you determine for yourself? Religion is prohibited?" - witness M.V. Rannev showed the court: "The activities of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle" are prohibited. But people explained that they do not belong to this organization, but are followers of this religion." And further: to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Did you not stop the divine services that took place after liquidation, since you believed that religion was not prohibited?" - witness Rannev M.V. showed the court: Official duties do not allow me to conduct ORM. Citizens explained that they are not members of the MRO. But this does not mean that if they used to be a member of this organization, they cannot continue to profess this faith" (V. 18, ll.d. 117, turnover). In fact, M.V. Rannev completely withstuded himself from the qualification of the actions of the defendant and other faithful Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow. Eagle as the activity of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". Despite this, the court drew the opposite conclusion in the verdict. Particular attention should be paid to the court's assessment of the testimony of the witness "Yermolov A.P.", whose information about whose identity was "kept secret". According to the meaning of Art. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the European Convention), as identified in the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECHR) of 23.04.1997 in the case of Van Mechelen and Others v. (complaints Nos Nos. 21363/93, 21364/ Recognizing D.O. Christensen guilty of "organizing the activities of an extremist organization", the court relied on the following facts allegedly established by it: "D.O. Christensen was a spiritual leader" and "represented as the head of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" (pp. 2 and In this case, the court actually implied only the testimony of the witness "Ermolov A.P.", since only when reproducing the testimony of this person in the verdict the court indicated: "Ermolov A.P. ... met Christensen D.O. in 2015, who introduced himself to him as the head of the MRO of Jehovah Firstly, this conclusion does not correspond to the actual data of "Yermolov A.P." According to the minutes of the court session (Vol. 18, l.d. 155) to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Do you know the defendant Christensen?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "I have known him since the end of 2015. He was presented to me as the leader of Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle." Thus, the witness did not speak on the defendant as the head of the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". Secondly, the entire interrogation of "Ermolov A.P." on May 30, 2018 was accompanied by constant interference in the sound transmission by special equipment[1] of his voice to the participants of the process, including the secretary and the court. In this regard, all the testimony of "Ermolov A.P." recorded in the minutes of the court session on May 30, 2018 are the guesses of the secretary and his interpretation, made from fragments of the witness's phrases. This is confirmed, among other things, by the minutes of the court session (Vol. 18, l.d. 155): "Lawyer A.N. Bogdanov said: "The quality of audio communication does not allow you to truly perceive the information"; At 1:00 p.m., the court ruled: "To declare a break before 10 hours 30 The relevant facts are also recorded in the comments on the minutes of the court session since May 30, 2018. Thirdly, "Ermolov A.P." was unable to explain what it is - "the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". So, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "What do you mean by "member of the organization"?" witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "A member of the organization is the one who regularly attended meetings." To the subsequent question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Do you mean the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle?", - witness A.P. Ermolov showed the court: "Those who lived in the city of Orel and attended these meetings, they were members." To the clarifying question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Everyone who lived in the city of Orel and attended these meetings, are members of the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses Eagle?" - witness Ermolov A.P. showed the court: "Yes." (Vol. 18, l.d. 160, turnover). Also to the question of the court: "Did you hear the MRO Jehovah's Witnesses of the Eagle from anyone present?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed the court: "No" (Vol. 18, l.d. 164). The logic of "Ermolov A.P." is most clearly traced in the following segment: "On the question of the court: "Why do you think that the meeting on Zheleznodorozhnaya St., 50 belongs to the MRO, which was liquidated?" - witness A.P. Yermolov showed to the court: "Beca 164). Consequently, for "A.P. Yermolov" the concepts of "persons professing the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses" and the liquidated local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" are completely identical and it makes no distinction between them. In such a situation, for A.P. Yermolov, any Jehovah's Witness of the city of Oryol was a member of an extremist organization. In this regard, his testimony about Christensen D.O. and "his role in the organization" cannot have any evidentiary force, as the witness found an inability to differentiate such concepts as the "religion of Jehovah's Witnesses" and the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". A good analysis of the testimony of the witness "Ermolov A.P." is presented in the debate of defender Krasnikova I.A. In particular, the attention of the court of first instance was drawn to the following: "I did not testify on many counts (organization of storage of literature in electronic form; distribution and receipt of extremist literature; organization of sermons; collection of funds). On a number of circumstances of the criminal case, he said: "I don't know, I haven't seen it, I can't name it." Thus, to the question "who determined the speaker at the divine services" there was an answer: "I do not know"; to the question about the dissemination of literature - "I can not name specific names"; on the issue of blood transfusion - "Kristensen did not say anything about this"; to the question about who accepted new members of the organization - "I do not know Made a decision on who to become a member of the local organization? And what do you know about it?" - "This information is unknown to me"; when asked about the presence or absence of extremist literature at divine services: "I did not have the opportunity to compare the literature I saw with the list of prohibited extremist literature"; to the prosecutor's question: "Did Kristen distribute literature to those who came?" Witness: "No"; to the question of protection: "did you check the contents of the tablets used by persons who visited the divine services of Jehovah's Witnesses?" - the witness "did not check"; to the question of protection: "the source of my awareness that donations were transferred by non-cash transfers from individuals" - witness: "I do A number of information reported by the witness is based on assumptions: "young people were on duty at the door, apparently determined by him (Christensen)." Often the witness contradicted himself. At first, he talked about strict documentation in the "organization", about the duties of the elder, initiators in St. Petersburg and even about Melnik as an official leader. Then he stated: "I did not see the document that enshrines the duties of the elders, I can not name the literature in which they were allegedly written; the organization is closed, I was not at a high level of trust; after the services, I mostly left immediately, I do not know what happened after I left; I did not specifically overheard what the Yes, and how can a witness know the organizational details that he tried to tell us if he, like others, came to the meeting out of interest in doctrine, and we saw what they were talking about at the divine services. We saw what was written in the literature. All testimony is based on the witness's misunderstanding of very important things. Thus, the witness for himself derived the criterion by which a person can be attributed to a member of the MRO (on the question of protection: "is the criterion of attribution to attending meetings? Is that what you personally defined for yourself?" the witness says, "That's right." There were also outright lies. About Prikhodko and Skrynnikov, he said that they were more active, made speeches, maintained order in the hall, assisted Christensen, he repeatedly noticed them at the gate. At the same time, the witness said that he "visited one of the three meetings." And when asked by the defense, does he know that Christensen and Skrynnikov attended different meetings in the city of Orel?" - witness: "I don't know that." V.I. Banshchikov's witness, who attended one meeting with the defendant, in relation to the presence of Prikhodko and Skrynnikov at such services, replied: "I haven't seen it for 7 years." It is also important to draw attention to the fact of unmotivated refusal by the court to satisfy the request of the defense for the disclosure of authentic data on the identity of the witness "Ermolov A.P." (Vol. 14, p.d. 101 - 103). Despite the absence of those listed in Part 5 of Art. 278 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation grounds for keeping secret the original data on the identity of the witness (threats to him, his relatives or his property), as well as the fact of interrogation of "Ermolov A.P." on November 10, 2017 under his real name - O.G. Kurdyumov (Vol. 10 Thus, the court violated Art. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms without ensuring a fair trial. Witness A.A. Chirikov never mentioned the words of the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" in his testimony. At the same time, when asked by lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "Do you understand the difference between a religious group, religious organization, religious association?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I understand the division between them by number" (V. 18, l.d. 134), - which allows to establish a complete lack of understanding Therefore, the court's conclusion on page 7 of the verdict is untenable: "On the fact that after the ban by the court of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" in the building at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., their meetings continued to be held regularly, witness A.A. Chirikov, who lives next to this building, also indicated in court. The said witness simply did not give such testimony. Everything reported by A.A. Chirikov to the court was reduced to the actions of D.O. Christensen near the household gate at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. in the city of Orel, because by his own admission he was never inside the building, and only occasionally passed by. So, to the question of the court: "Shortly before May 2017, did you see that the defendant met people near the gate?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "Yes, after October 2016 I saw it." To the question of the court: "Defendant also met and saw off people?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I saw him communicate with people on the street in front of this building." When asked by the court: "Among the people who cleaned the territory, did you see Christensen?" witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I saw him at the time of cleaning." At the same time, to the question of the court: "Who led the persons who cleaned the territory?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "I don't know" (vol. 18, p.d. 134, turnover). Surprisingly, it was on the basis of such testimony about Christensen D.O.'s communication with people on the street and cleaning the territory that the court concluded no less about Christensen's leadership of D.O. by an extremist organization, as if any of the witness listed was a real public danger. At the same time, to the question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "How do you explain by what signs you determined that a group of people was under the leadership of Christensen?" - witness Chirikov A.A. showed the court: "Because people were doing something, and he walked and this is my inner conviction on observations." In fact, such testimony of A.A. Chirikov was just his assumptions and had no evidentiary value for the case. This can be seen from the following fragment of the interrogation: to the question of lawyer Krasnikova I.A.: "Is this your assumption that Christensen led the process?" - witness A.A. Chirikov showed the court: "Yes" (vol. 18, l.d. 133, turnover). The testimony of witness Romanova G.A. was fully reduced to the circumstances of the divine services of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Orel at Zheleznodorozhnaya St., d. 50. At the same time, the witness never informed the court (as well as at the preliminary investigation) that such services were conducted by the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". With regard to D.O. Christensen, Romanov's witness G.A. showed to the court: "Christensen was the same "brother" as everyone else" (vol. 18, l.d. 110, turnover). Also, when asked by lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Can you say that Christensen went on stage or was near the gate more often than others?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "No, he was like everyone else. He didn't stand out." To an additional question from V.Yu. Zhenkov's lawyer: "During the divine service, did Christensen have a special role?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "No, she had no special role." To the subsequent question of lawyer Zhenkov V.Yu.: "Did you consider Christensen the main one among Jehovah's witnesses in Orel?" - Romanov's witness G.A. showed the court: "I didn't count. The brothers are all equal." (vol. 18, p.d. 111, turnover). The court also distorted the testimony of witness Chernetsova E.A. On page 8 of the verdict, the testimony is reproduced as follows: "She attended the Central meeting, which was held by the defendant" and "At the meetings she heard that only Christensen D.O. was called an elder and no one else." In fact, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "How did the service go?" - witness E.A. Chernetsov showed the court: "One of the "brothers" came out and we studied the Bible, explained the poems. We had unprohibited brochures. Sometimes Christensen performed" (t. 18, d.d. 126). Further, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Was Christensen an elder?" - E.A. Chernetsov's witness showed the court: "Someone told me that Christensen was an elder, but I don't remember who said it and whether it was true. I don't remember when I met Christensen." Thus, the witness reported "Christensen's speech" and not his divine services. In addition, as can be seen from E.A. Chernetsova's answer, she did not say that the only elder was Christensen D.O. and no one else. At first glance, the circumstances of reproducing the testimony of E.A. Chernetsova in the sentence are not so significant, since D.O. Christensen directly recognized himself as the elder of Jehovah's Witnesses. However, the witness did not talk about the defendant as the only elder of the city. Eagle. In view of the fact that the court reduced all the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in the mentioned city to only one person - the defendant - such distortions negatively affected the validity of the sentence. Similarly, the testimony of witness Banshchikova V.I. On pages 8 and 9 of the verdict, the court pointed out in relation to the testimony of the witness: "I knew that he was the elder of the assembly who knew the Bible better than others, and she turned to him for clarification" and "Knows that the defendant came to the "Hall of the Kingdom" before others and cleared the territory." In fact, to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Have Christensen been asked for advice?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "Yes, and he helped me with advice." To the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Why did you turn to him for advice?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I could turn to anyone." Thus, the "appeal for advice" was not something out of the ordinary and did not indicate any "special role" of the defendant. Also to the question of the state prosecutor Fomin I.A.: "Did Kristenen help to do the cleaning?" - Banshchikov's witness V.I. showed the court: "Yes, he sometimes came earlier and removed snow from the path so that we could pass." However, the court reproduced the words "sometimes came earlier" in the sentence as permanent actions. Such distortions are all the more surprising, since Christensen D.O.'s actions in cleaning the territory, associated with an earlier appearance near the household, do not form signs of any extremist activity (vol. 18, p.d. 137, turnover). At the same time, the court pointed out in the verdict: "However, testifying at the preliminary investigation as a witness, V.I. Banshchikova did not deny her awareness of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", and referred to the fact that at the address: Orel, Zheleznodorozhnaya St., 50 divine services of this local religious organization were held at meetings (volume No. 9, h.d. 136-138). At the same time, as stated in the verdict "assessing the contradictions in the testimony of witness V.I. Banshchikova, given in court and at the preliminary investigation in terms of her attendance at the meetings of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", the court attaches evidentiary importance to the latter (vol Unfortunately, the court did not provide in the verdict the explanation of such "contradictions" given by the witness in the court session. At the same time, to the question of lawyer A.N. Bogdanov about the testimony at the investigation: "Do you confirm these testimony?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "No, I didn't answer like that. When employee Polyakov wrote that he was an elder, I said that Christensen did not tell me personally that he was an elder. I didn't know that I had the right to make the inscription "my words are not written correctly." When Polyakov asked about 25.05.2017, I thought, he was talking about worship. I didn't feel well that day. I wrote that I have no statements or comments to the protocol, as I did not know that comments could be made." To the clarifying question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N. according to the testimony at the investigation: "To the question "for what reasons were you in the building at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St.?" You gave the answer "The purpose of my visit was the divine service of the MRO "Witnesses of Jehovah's Eagle"?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "No, I said I was at the divine service. I don't know what a local religious organization is" (vol. 18, lt.d. 143, turnover). The fact that the entire protocol of the interrogation of V.I. Banshchikova during the investigation is entirely the work of FSB operative M.S. Polyakov and does not contain the words of the witness himself can be seen from the following fragment. In court, when asked by lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "At the time of interrogation, on 29.06.2017 did you know the full name of the defendant?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I knew his name was Dennis." To the clarifying question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N.: "Polyakov wrote down your answer: "The old man of the meeting was Christensen D.O." Can you explain what "D.O." is?" - V.I. Banshchikov's witness showed the court: "I don't know it and I can't explain it." The specificity of this court case is the participation of a foreign citizen who does not have a patronymic. D.O. Christensen is Dennis Ole Christensen, where the word "Ole" is not a patronymic, but a second name. In the court, Banshchikova V.I. explained: she knows the defendant as "Christensen Dennis", and she did not know his second name. Accordingly, the mention of the full name, including the "second name" (D.O. Christensen), in the interrogation protocol at the investigation refutes the recording of the words of the witness himself. Instead, FSB operative M.S. Polyakov recorded V.I. Banshchikova's answers in the interpretation he needed. The court of first instance ignored such significant circumstances and did not evaluate them. Instead, he hastened to take as a basis the "testimony" of V.A. Banshchikova on the investigation, as they were more convenient for conviction. In the verdict, the court did not take into account, assessing the testimony of witness Gavrikov E.A., that the latter never personally communicated with the defendant and all the information reported to him about the defendant is allegedly known to him from the words of his mother, Zinaida Mikhailovna Gavrikova. At the same time, according to the interrogation protocol of Z.M. Gavrikova in the case materials, the latter refused to answer all the questions of the investigation, citing Art. 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (t. 9, h.d. 235 - 237). The prosecution party and the court in violation of Part 1 of Art. 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the testimony of E.A. Gavrikov was not checked for reliability by interrogating the person from whose alleged words the witness knows the reported information - Gavrikova Z.M. At the same time, to the question of lawyer A.N. Bogdanov: "By organization and sect you mean all Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow. Eagle?" - witness Gavrikov E.A. showed the court: "Yes." To the subsequent question of lawyer Bogdanov A.N.: "Do you understand the difference between a religious association, a religious organization and a religious group?" - witness Gavrikov E.A. showed the court: "I can't explain" (V. 18, etc. 120). From the interrogation protocol, the testimony of a witness on the issue of Their understanding of the word "organization": "Just don't invent, tell me. Do you understand, don't you understand? If you understand what you mean by that?" to which E.A. Gavrikov was given the following answer: "There is such, I don't know, invented, Jehovah, God, in whom these people will believe." To the clarifying question of protection "Do you mean this by this word?" And the answer of witness Gavrikov E.A. sounded: "Yes, I understand that." These circumstances are given in the comments to the minutes of the court session in relation to May 14, 2018. It is also important to note that the testimony of E.A. Gavrikov cited by the court in the verdict, according to which allegedly "After the liquidation of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" he told her (mother) that it was no longer possible to attend their meetings and she could be brought to justice. To this she had a prepared response to law enforcement officers in case of detention that the event she attended was not a meeting of the MRO "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", but a meeting of individual followers of the creed" - was given by a witness at the investigation and was not announced in the court session. Thus, according to the minutes of the court session, the court (vol. 18, p.d. 121, turnover) read the testimony of witness E.A. Gavrikov, contained in volume 9 on l.d. 241, i.e. not in cavity, but in part. At the same time, the mentioned testimony "that the event she attends is not a meeting of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", but a meeting of individual followers of the doctrine" is contained in volume 9 on the sheet of case 242, which was not disclosed during the judicial investigation. Distortion of the content of the case materials On page 15 of the verdict, the court indicated: "In addition, during the search on 25.05.2017 at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., an Instruction entitled "Procedure for serving at the gate and negotiations" was found and seized in the defendant's folder, which instructs Jehovah's Witnesses, including those on duty at the entrance, in the lobby before and after meetings, to answer questions from the authorities about the voluntariness of 84-102, 103-167)." In fact, a notebook with records named by the court "Instruction "Procedure for serving at the gate and negotiations" was found not in the folder of the defendant Christensen D.O., but in Leiba Yu.S., as follows from the protocol of inspection of objects (documents) of June 7, 2017 - v. 4 hp. 112. Such "instructions" in the defendant's folder seized during the search on 25.05.2017 at the address: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., not found - v. 4, h.d. 103 - 108. In addition, the objects themselves seized from Christensen D.O. during the searches as at: Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., and in the defendant's home itself (Orel, Instrumentation, 42, apt. 39) - were not investigated by the parties and the court during court sessions. Accordingly, the court violated the requirements of Part 3 of Art. 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, according to which the court verdict can be based only on the evidence that was examined in the court session. In any case, handwritten notes in a notebook seized from Leiba Yu.S., according to which "There is no MRO in the hall. The divine service is just taking place," - only confirm the position of the defense on the inattactivity of divine services at the address: g. Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. to the activities of a local religious organization. It is necessary to adhere exclusively to the accusatory bias in assessing evidence in order to consider such records a continuation of the activities of the liquidated local religious organization, and not to recognize them as what they really are - written notes of a person who understands the situation and realizes the complete non-participation of the actions of believers in the activities of a local According to the protocol of inspection of objects (documents) of June 7, 2017 (t. 4, p.d. 108 - 110), cleaning schedules, weekly plans for meetings from 08.05.2017 to 04.06.2017, lists of persons on duty at the gate of the household fence, the front door of the "Hard of the Kingdom" and in the foyer before and after Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. is freely available and were located on a stand in the hallway. In this regard, the seizure of similar documents directly from the defendant (page 17 of the verdict) has no evidentiary value: these documents could have any means of their accessibility. At the same time, according to the testimony of witness V.V. Melnik, who previously headed the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", the listed documents were never used in the activities of such an organization (vol. 19, p.d. 141, turnover - 143) and were not inherent in it. In this regard, the court's conclusions reflected on page 17 of the verdict are also not substantiated: "According to the protocol of the search of 25.05.2017 and the conclusions of computer and technical forensic examination No. 822/1-1 of 20.10.2017, in the task at: Year Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St., various electronic media with information related to the activities of the banned organization were seized. All these "information", or rather electronic materials, were studied in court sessions and there is none among them that would be on the list of extremist materials (at least at the time of the search) or would be related to the activities of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". The court's conclusions set out on pages 17 - 18 of the verdict, according to which "During the search at the place of residence of Christensen D.O. 25.05.2017 at the address: g. Orel, 42, 39 Priborostroitelnaya St., were found and seized: ... certificates of the Centralized Regional Religious Organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" according to which he was an employee of this Center, receiving wages, lived and conducted religious activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Orel (volume 4, hp. 177-240)." Firstly, the court did not reflect in the verdict the results of the study in the court session the certificates of the Centralized Regional Religious Organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia", which cover the interval from 2006 to August 2009, which is not part of the period of "criminal" activity sane to Christensen D.O. (v 233 - 236). Secondly, the court did not give or assess the testimony of the defendant received on July 2, 2018 according to these documents (vol. 18, p.d. 176, turnover - 177). At the same time, the relevant circumstances were explained. Thus, when asked by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "During the fragment of the conversation listened to, you say that the spiritual connection between "Jehovah's Witnesses", what does it mean?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "This means that all "Jehovah's Witnesses" living in various cities All Jehovah's Witnesses, there is a spiritual connection between them, a fraternal connection. Before the management center was liquidated, some of the management center could travel to regions, different cities and maintain a conversation about the Bible, communicate with local brothers and sisters - this was a spiritual connection, or which was very rare when Jehovah's Witnesses began to preach a lot, 5 to 7 hours a day, because they wanted to tell how many more people about God's In this case, the management center could assist Jehovah's Witnesses, issue a certain amount for the purchase of food, or for any transportation costs, and this until the relevant "Jehovah's Witness" found a suitable job, or the termination of preaching work in such a large amount. Based on this, Jehovah's Witness could concentrate most of his time preaching God's kingdom. To the question of defender A.N. Bogdanov: "Personally, did you receive any money from the management center at this stage?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "Yes, I received it from about 2007 to 2009. Since 2009, I stopped receiving money because I registered myself as a private entrepreneur and started working, and no longer needed material assistance. When asked by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "In 2016, and later, did you receive any money from the management center?" Defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "No" (vol. 18, l.d. 176, turnover - 177). Further on the text of the verdict, the court also states: "In addition, a large number (more than 820 copies) of various religious literature was found, including leaflets aimed at involving Jehovah's Witnesses in religious activities. The volume of such literature and the absence of signs of use on their packages indicate the purpose of its distribution. The court assessed the religious literature found during the search of Christensen's house D.O. despite the fact that it had never reviewed or examined it in a court session. This evidence was not presented to the prosecution to the court and therefore could not form the basis of the sentence. However, none of these publications were included in the list of extremist materials, which excludes the possibility of such literature confirming the fact of "extremist" activities. Similarly, the following court arguments cannot confirm Christensen D.O.'s involvement in any extremist activity. Receipt by the defendant by means of CMC of notifications of activation of the security alarm set at the address: g. Orel, 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. is not something prohibited by law. Moreover, this does not confirm any "special leadership role" of the defendant among the Oryol Jehovah's Witnesses. Thus, according to the case materials (V. 3, etc. 166, 177, 182, 199 and 218) Christensen received about 5 such SMS messages during the entire sane period, and three of them indicated the following plan: "USER 22," "USER 6", "USER 3". According to the explanations of the translator Uskov A.I., this word is translated as "user" and thus indicates a significant number of users of such a security alarm system: together with the defendant about 22 people. CMC messages to Grogol M.S. V.G., Maksimova V.G., Slastina M.V., Zhurbenko A.G., Terentyeva Yu.P. about duty near the gate of the "Her of the Kingdom" and in the foyer during meetings on 26.02.2017, 28.02.2017, 16.03.2017 and 06.05.2017 are also not criminal. As the defendant explained when testifying: "Indeed, the brothers and sisters stood at the gate, and the gate really closed. But there really wasn't any pass regime. It is important to take into account two points here. First, it is customary for Jehovah's Witnesses around the world to welcome their brothers and sisters who come to worship, so some brothers voluntarily come earlier at will and meet other brothers and sisters at the door. And this is not a pass regime. Secondly, the brothers at the gate have always had to monitor security, as hatred and enmity have been escalated in society towards Jehovah's Witnesses for many years, and there may have been cases of vandalism and violence, as was the case in some other cities. Believers had the right to seek help from the police or hire another security service for a fee to be on duty near the Hall of the Kingdom, guarding Jehovah's peaceful Witnesses from potential vandals and extremists, but they preferred to be on duty at the gate" (vol. 20, p.d. 68, turnover). The same testimony was given by witnesses E.A. Chernetsova and V.I. Banshchikova. The court unilaterally presents the situation with writing such SMS messages: only those messages in which the defendant asks someone to do something are given. However, the court kept silent about the presence of other kinds of SMS messages, where various kinds of requests were already addressed to Christensen D.O. Thus, on April 20, 2017, according to the protocol of inspection and listening to phonograms of June 6, 2017, D.O. Christensen's number received messages from the phone number registered on A.V. Bondarenko with the following text: "maybe let someone go to the gate", "for observation"; then from the number registered on E.G. Chern 207, 208). The above shows that all such correspondence was the usual communication of believers who knew each other well and attended peaceful services together. Subsequent court statements about Christensen D.O.'s actions, such as "instructed", "coordinated actions", "exempt from speeches at meetings", based on the "assessment" of the defendant's telephone conversations, have nothing to do with the real content of telephone conversations. The defense does not consider it necessary to focus the attention of the court of appeal on each telephone conversation mentioned by the court in its verdict in order to show an absolute discrepancy between the content of the conversation and the assessment given to it by the court. This would lead to an increase in the volume of additional appeal by dozens of pages, as this implies full reproduction of the corresponding fragments of each telephone conversation. In this regard, the defense will bring only a few of Christensen's conversations by D.O. Christensen mentioned by the court in the verdict. On page 19 of the verdict, the court writes: "At the request of Esmurziev Sh.V., Tyklev A.S., Smirnov P.S. and Bachurin A.V. exempted them from speeches at meetings, checking the accounts of meetings in connection with illness and resolved issues of their replacement by others." Let's take D.O. Christensen's conversation with the first person mentioned by the court - Sh.V. Esmurziev. Its content is set out in the protocol of inspection and listening to phonograms of 06.06.2017 (volume 3 h.d. 179-180), also in the meeting the parties listened to the audio recording file of such a conversation - "58FF6FD5.wav" (providence proof - optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UK Here is the verbatim content of the conversation: D.O. Christensen: Yes! This is Dennis Esmurziev Sh.V.: Hello! Hi, brother! Christensen D.O.: Yes, hello! Esmurziev Sh.V.: Listen, I'll tell you five seconds, I won't be able to come today, something began to feel very bad, my head hurt and doesn't go away, so I drink pills, they don't help. Christensen D.O.: Yeah Esmurziev Sh.V.: Listen, I have to read today instead of Artem. Christensen D.O.: Yeah Esmurziev Sh.V.: Can't you find someone for me? D.O. Christensen: Of course, of course. Listen, you'd better call Bachurin, he's the chairman. It is on the basis of this fragment of the conversation that the court concludes that D.O. Christensen released from his speech at the meeting Sh.V. Esmurziev. The failure of the judicial assessment is more than obvious. So, Sh.V. Esmurziev does not ask the defendant a question like: "Can I not come to the meeting-service if I'm sick?" On the contrary, the interlocutor talks about his personal decision not to come due to illness and asks Christensen D.O. to find someone in his place to "read". At the same time, D.O. Christensen does not solve this issue himself, but asks to "call Bachurin." On this telephone conversation, the defendant's testimony was received: "Ordinary telephone conversations, in which the perverts share information about their illness or other life circumstances, are also unreasonably presented by the prosecution as a kind of "leading" role on my part, during which I allegedly "allow" not to attend the divine services of the MRO. However, in fact, firstly, the file "58FF6FD5.wav" is out of MRO, and secondly, I can't allow or prohibit anyone to attend services. This is an absolutely voluntary work of every believer. The essence of our conversation was that my friend called me and asked me to find one of the brothers who could agree to read the Bible at the divine service instead of him, because he fell ill. This is quite normal, because Jehovah's Witnesses have such qualities as mutual assistance and responsibility. In the days when I couldn't attend services for some reason, I also called my co-religionists so that they wouldn't worry about me." The court ignored such a clear and logical explanation of the defendant in the verdict and did not give any assessment. The court also concludes: "V.G. Maksimov consulted with D.O. Christensen about the upcoming expenses of the meetings. The defendant, in turn, gave him instructions on when and how to dispose of the funds received from the donation in the Hall of the Kingdom. Informed him about the methods and procedure for accounting for money. He gave instructions on the destruction of documents related to monetary accounting, depending on the presence or absence of necessity. He advised on the schedule of meetings, appointed him chairman of the meeting and gave advice on drawing up speeches on them. At the same time, the court does not indicate in the verdict what kind of telephone conversations and corresponding audio recording files it means. Apparently, the court meant the audio files of telephone conversations 30551F1H.wav, 307A5760.wav, D2584621.wav, 035737EB.wav (meaning proof - optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UK15051227 1), held between the defendant and Maksimov V.G 166 - 171, 192 - 193, 196 - 197). In order to show the complete bias of the judicial assessment of such conversations, let's take one of them - dated April 1, 2017 (i.e. 3, 196 - 197): D.O. Christensen: Yes! This is Dennis. Maksimov V.G.: Hi, Dennis! Christensen D.O.: Yeah, hi! Maksimov V.G.: Listen, I was engaged in accounting here, started counting something in papers, found some incomprehensible accounts for 2016 on Oleg Gennadyevich Ivkin. Christensen D.O.: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Maksimov V.G.: So, I don't know what to do with them, destroy them or give them to anyone. To be honest, I don't even remember how I got them and what I need them for. Christensen D.O.: Yes. Maksimov V.G.: Here, I have them Christensen D.O.: Listen, while you save. Are they digital or paper? Maksimov V.G.: Paper D.O. Christensen: Yeah. Then we will discuss this issue tomorrow. Maksimov V.G.: Will I bring them tomorrow? D.O. Christensen: Yes Maksimov V.G.: Okay. D.O. Christensen: Then we'll see what it is. Maksimov V.G.: Okay. Christensen D.O.: And who gave it to you, or do you just have them? Maksimov V.G.: well, I don't know how I got them. The thing is, I don't remember what it is or what it's for. And there are a lot of them. Christensen D.O.: yes. I guess I know what it is, but I can't say for sure. Maksimov V.G.: I have a contract for emergency dispatching and rescue services. I still have an account for 40% of the cost of electricity "Orlovsky Energosbyt", and more than one account. D.O. Christensen: You know, well, that's very good. Maksimov V.G.: I have an act of work performed. Kristensen D.O.: In theory, you know, you need to discuss what's going on with Tyklev. According to the case materials (V. 1, l.d. 117 - 118) the person mentioned in the conversation, for whom the paid invoices of Maximov V.G. are issued - Oleg Gennadyevich Ivkin - is the owner of the building at 50 Zheleznodorozhnaya St. in the city of Orel. And as follows from the context of the conversation, these accounts and acts are related to the payment of electricity, as well as emergency dispatch and rescue services of the relevant household. A reasonable question arises: what can actions to pay for utilities, rescue services have to do with crime and extremist activities, as well as a discussion on the "preservation" or "destruction" of such accounts (?). Whoever and whatever says to another person about it, all this has been and remains legitimate actions to fulfill civil obligations to utility providers. All this only emphasizes the position originally indicated by the defense in the appeal: the court of first instance distinguishes between the law and the crime on the principle of religion of the perpetrators of any actions. If in the city of Jehovah's Witnesses talk about paying for utilities, it immediately becomes a crime for the court, while the court itself pays for the same services as hundreds of thousands of other residents of the city. Eagle. But if Jehovah's Witnesses do it and it is related to the building where the divine services take place, all this immediately becomes a crime for the court. It is also worth noting the defendant's testimony on all these four telephone conversations: "In addition, I want to briefly explain those telephone conversations in which some financial issues are discussed. These are the files "30551FIH.wav", "307A5760.wav", "D2584621.wav", "035737EB.wav". These conversations were about financial audits of the accounting of those voluntary donations that were received in the boxes of the Central meeting. The dialogue did not talk about the finances of the MRO. I've never had anything to do with the funds of the MRO and I can't explain anything about it because I don't know. As for the voluntary donations of our meeting, I want to clarify the following. Aware of their responsibility to God, Jehovah's Witnesses around the world try very carefully to the accounting and expenditure of donated funds. As witnesses have repeatedly said in the court session, Jehovah's Witnesses can make voluntary donations around the world by putting money in boxes located in the places where their services are held. Jehovah's Witnesses do not have mandatory fees. In addition, donations are anonymous, so no one controls other believers on whether he made donations and, if so, in what amount. Also, there is no mandatory or predetermined amount of donations. However, the accounting of donated funds was carried out, and the funds were spent exclusively for peaceful purposes, namely the common needs of believers, such as payment of utility bills for the Hall of the Kingdom, repair and maintenance of the liturgical building, assistance to believers affected by natural disasters. The court also ignored this fact. For the same reasons, the following court conclusion is not justified: "V.V. Melnik, M.V. Slastin, A.G. Zhurbenko and I.V. Mironov were officially part of the liquidated local religious organization "Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle" and were its members (volume 1 hp. 124-126). The above negotiations, among other things, testify to the coordination by the defendants of their actions aimed at continuing the implementation of the Chartered goals of the religious association, in respect of which the court made a decision that has entered into force to liquidate in connection with extremist activities. The court ignored that all these persons, along with the defendant, are Jehovah's Witnesses and maintain to varying degrees of communication with each other, including on religious topics. In particular, when asked by the prosecutor about communication with Christensen, D.O., witness V.V. Melnik explained: "There was no question of any interaction, and in relation to seeing or not, I no longer remember, I did not record each meeting. We are a community of Jehovah's Witnesses, we communicate, so it is possible that we saw each other once, but it was not some planned meeting or something else" (i. 19, p.d. 172, turnover). These fragments of specific telephone conversations of the defendant clearly show the bias and partiality of the conclusions of the court of first instance. Any normal act or word committed was perceived by the court solely in accusatory bias. At the same time, the court did not give a single specific phrase from telephone conversations, mentioning only its personal perception of the speech of the interlocutors. The court's assessment of the conversation in the Country Chicken cafe between Christensen D.O. and Kurdyumov O.G. also does not correspond to the real content of such a conversation. The court writes: "during the conversation about the court's decision prohibiting the activities of the Jehovah's Witnesses, the defendant, referring to the Bible, said that God said there was no need to stop. Therefore, the work continued, because Jehovah's Witnesses must obey the law until this law contradicts God's law (volume 2 hp. 1, 2-34)." First, according to the case materials at the time of the conversation - May 16, 2017 - there were two court decisions. The first is the decision of the Oryol Regional Court of June 14, 2016 on the liquidation of the MRO of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle". The second is the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 20, 2017 on the liquidation of the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia", which at that time had not yet entered into force and therefore was not generally binding. In the conversation, provocateur O.G. Kurdyumov does not mention what kind of decision he means (V. 2, etc. 80): D.O. Christensen: If not, we'll get out somehow. As if they didn't stop, by no means. It can't be, we can't stop. The Bible clearly states that we must come together to strengthen each other. And it is clear that we need to preach. Since God said that, we can't stop. That would be wrong with him. Kurdyumov O.G.: Yes. And in relation to the court decision? (Laughs) Christensen D.O.: What? Kurdyumov O.G.: What about the court decision? Christensen D.O.: Look, if the Bible says very well: to whom should we obey more? People or God? O.G. Kurdyumov: God? Christensen D.O.: Yes. That's why a person can say anything. There is a very good, we can say, principle in the Bible that we must obey the laws when these laws do not contradict God's laws. This means that if they say something else, we must obey. God demands it from us. That's what we do: we pay taxes and everything else. But when something is said against the law of God, then people, man, well, he puts himself above. It's not possible. Do you understand this meaning? In this regard, the defense asked the defendant the following question in the court session of July 2, 2017 (V. 18, L.D. 182) when examining the relevant operational audio recording: "When Kurdyumov asked you about the attitude to the court decision, which court were you thinking about, he asked you?" To this question, the defendant Christensen D.O. explained: "It was about the court decision, about the closure of the management center in St. Petersburg." The honesty of this answer is also confirmed by the circumstances clarified during the court session on July 11, 2017 during a study and audition with the translation of a telephone conversation between the defendant and his father Jess Christensen of 13.05.2017: Jess Christensen: Well, how are you doing? Dennis Christensen: Things are fine. Everything here is quiet and peaceful now. Everything seemed to stop. We are waiting for an appeal against the case, an appeal against the case, the decision on the case will be made on June 13, we can be alone until June 13. Yes, that's for sure, there are small problems all around, but I have no problems, absolutely. Problems will appear only after, as it is called, after the trial." In this regard, the following statement was made by defender A.N. Bogdanov: "In order to understand what court decision we are talking about, it is necessary to restore the date of the conversation, apparently the conversation was 13.05.2017. And the appeal against the court decision, which is really relevant, is the decision of the Oryol Regional Court of 14.06.2016, its appeal took place in October 2016. In May 2017, there could be no question of appealing this decision, as it was more than six months ago. Here we are talking about: in the conversation "we were waiting for an appeal, an appeal in the case, the decision will be made on 13.06, you can be calm until June 13," that is, we are talking about a decision, the appeal of which has not yet been considered at the time of the conversation, that is, for May 2017. Of the court decisions, only one decision meets these criteria - this is the decision of 20.04.2017 on the liquidation of the legal entity Management Center "Jehovah's Witnesses of Russia". It is strange that the prosecutor says that since the interlocutors say that there will be an appeal on June 13, then they are aware of the illegality of their actions. But if the appeal, the decision has not yet entered into force, that is, there can be no legality or illegality of any actions (vol. 18, pp. 203, turnover). These circumstances are also confirmed by the card of the case on the liquidation of the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia" on the website of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (https://vsrf.ru/lk/practice/cases/5414926). In particular, it refers to the court session held in such a case of June 13, 2017, during which one of the private complaints of the administrative defendant was considered. And this was the first appeal hearing in the case, albeit on a private issue. In this regard, many believers, as can be seen from the conversation between the defendant and his father, considered June 13, 2017 to be the date of the main appeal hearing to review the decision to liquidate the religious organization "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia". In any case, none of these decisions imposed a ban on the confession and expression of the faith of Jehovah's Witnesses, as detailed in the main appeal. The court's arguments that by virtue of Art. 7 of the Federal Law "On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations" the head (representative) of a religious group must notify the registering body of the beginning of the activities of such a group. On this basis, on page 15 of the verdict, the court concludes: "Notifications of any religious groups of Jehovah's Witnesses about the beginning or continuation of their activities in the territory of the city of Oryol and the Oryol region did not receive the body authorized to make a decision on the state registration of a religious organization. At the same time, the court did not take into account that the relevant claim was made to this law only on July 13, 2015, and entered into force only on July 24, 2015. At the same time, according to the testimony of witnesses interrogated in the case, the religious group meeting "Central" in the city of Orel began its activities much earlier than 2015, and therefore the relevant legal provisions, as not retroactive, could not extend their effect to this religious group. In any case, the logic based on the statement "there is no notification piece of paper - there is no religious group" does not stand up to any criticism, since it is important to establish facts in the evidence in criminal proceedings, and not to focus on the presence of any notifications. In any case, if the court believes that the meeting of Jehovah's Witnesses "Central" city. The Eagle had to be "notified" of himself as a religious group, the fact of such a "violation" only confirms the existence of this group. Its actual existence cannot be made dependent on the presence of any "notifications". The assessment given by the court by the results of the ORM "Observation" of February 19 and 26, 2017 also has little to do with reality. Among other things, the court writes: "At the same time, attention was paid to strengthening faith and connection with God through the elder, whose advice should be listened to" (page 11 of the verdict). However, no such statements were made (optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UJ211255353). Similarly, at the divine service on February 26, 2017, "a lesson was not held with training in the correct and effective preaching activities of the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses." In fact, those present discussed the following: "Therefore, what else can adorn our teaching? Our appearance and the items we carry with us when we preach. It is clear that we are always clean, we always wear clean clothes, but it is also important to remember that our items that we use must also be clean... The Bible must be clean..." That's all. And this discussion was not conducted by Christensen D.O. (Optical disc DVD-R # PAP6 93UJ21125534 4). Here it is also important to pay attention to the distortion by the court of the results of the search on May 25, 2017 in the home of Maksimov V.G. According to page 21 of the sentence, during such a search, "electronic media and financial documents such as ... resolutions on the expenditure of funds of meetings for various needs of a local organization in the period from June 2015 to April 20, 2017 were allegedly found." In fact, neither these documents nor other case materials followed that such "resolutions" relate to the needs of a certain "local organization". At the same time, according to these documents, D.O. Christensen gave the following testimony: "The resolution is the decision of all Jehovah's Witnesses attending the divine services of a certain meeting to spend the donated money. That is, not someone specific decides on how to use donations, but all brothers and sisters together. Therefore, each resolution has the words: "FOR", "AGAINST" and "ABSTAINED", and next to them there are numbers that indicate the number of people who voted for one or the other. Therefore, it is all brothers and sisters who together decide how to use the donated money, not someone alone. The report on the verification of the accounts of the assembly is filled in on the basis of the principle from the Bible recorded in the second Epistle of the Apostle Paul Corinthians Chapter 8, verses: 20, 21. There, the Apostle Paul wrote about the need to beware of reproaches for donations and treat such donations honestly not only before God, but also before people. That is why Jehovah's Witnesses donations are made in writing. In this case, everything is obvious and honest, you can't hide something and be reproached. The purpose of such a report is to make sure that not a single ruble from the donations of brothers and sisters is lost. That is why Jehovah's Witnesses around the world - Denmark, Russia, Germany, etc. use such documents. Verification of the accounts of the meeting can be done by any Christian - Jehovah's Witness, who is trusted by brothers and sisters of the assembly. But such a "check" has nothing to do with any legal entity - organization. That is, it has nothing to do with the MRO" (vol. 20, l.d. 67, turnover, - 68). These testimony is consistent with the testimony of V.V. Melnik and is not refuted by the prosecution during the judicial investigation. On the basis of the above, and guided by Art. 28, Part 1 of Art. 49 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Articles 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 17 and 18 of the European Convention for the Protection of Rights and Freedoms, Art. 5, 7, 9, 14, 26, 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Article 24, Art. 389.15, paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Art. 389.20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Please: Cancel the sentence of the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of the city of Eagle of February 6, 2019, by which a citizen of the Kingdom of Denmark Christensen Dennis Ole was found guilty of committing a crime under the Kingdom of Denmark on December 18, 1972. Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Art. 389.20, Art. 389.23 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to acquittal Christensen Dennis Ole in connection with the absence of an event of a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Recognize Christensen Dennis Ole's right to rehabilitation. Investigate at the court session of the court of appeal the following evidence, which was examined by the court of first instance: Physical proof optical disc DVD-R No. PAP6 93UJ211255353 (fragments 00:09:09 − 00:11:46; 00:30:36 − 00:31:13; 00:58:34 − 01:02:42); Physical proof optical disc DVD-R No. PAP6 93UJ21125534 4 (fragments 00:33:10 - 00:33:40); Testimony of witness Azarenka P.S. in part of v. 18, l.d. 125; Testimony of witness Rannev in part of v. 18, l.d. 117 + turnover; Decision of the Soviet District Court of the city of Eagle of April 3, 2001 (Tol. 17, etc. 13 - 16); Ruling of the Oryol Regional Court of June 16, 2017 and the appeal ruling of the Oryol Regional Court of July 13, 2017 (v. 15, p.d. 197 - 198); Other evidence, the study of which will be announced in the court of appeal. We are requesting participation in the court session of the court of appeal. Sincerely, Defender Krasnikova I.A. Defender Bogdanov A.N. March 19, 2019. [1] The equipment completely changed the voice of the witness."

(translated from Russian to English with Apple Translate) https://jw-russia.org/docs/591.html?utm_content=sidebar "Transcript of the court session of 30.01.2019 In case No. 1-37/2018 charged with Christensen D. O. in committing a crime under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation Judge Rudnev A.N.: Defendant, do you want to speak in the debate? Defendant Christensen D.O. (translated by Uskov A.I.) Yes, Your Honor, I want to speak. Your Honor, I feel all the time in this case that I have already been convicted in advance. I have never understood or understood now why I should be in prison during the investigation and during this trial. I believe that this is an abuse of power and very unfair. During numerous extensions of my arrest in the pre-trial detention center, I heard the same thing all the time again and again. They tried very hard to tell me about my rights, and later they said that I am a Danish citizen and that the accusation against me is very serious, I can run away and therefore I have to be in prison. But all this means that nothing depends on me. Yes, I was born a Danish citizen and I don't want to change anything about it. And the accusation that was brought against me is very serious, but I didn't choose it myself. There was no evidence that I would like to escape from the investigation or from this court. And my behavior showed that I could be trusted. But I was still left in prison. I believe that the only reason for this is that I profess the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses and that the authorities use my cause to scare the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Oryol and in other cities of Russia and force them to renounce their faith. All this, in my opinion, shows that I have already been convicted or determined in advance. I kept thinking during these court sessions: "Why do I need to know about my rights if I'm still convicted in advance"? Already at the beginning of the FSB investigation, they drew my attention to the fact that I have no future here in Russia. One FSB officer, Mikhail Sergeyevich Polyakov, told me: "Maybe they love you in Denmark, but here in Russia you have no future, no future at all." Polyakov also said that it was very sad that I did not cooperate with the investigator, that is, that I did not admit my guilt, did not fall to my knees, did not cry and did not ask for mercy: the FSB is probably used to the fact that people do so. If I had cooperated with an investigator, then I would have been given only 3.5 years in prison. But since I did not want to admit my guilt, then the investigator will write the worst about me in the indictment and I will receive the maximum punishment. After that, he reproduced a video from the Internet on his phone, where one journalist said a lot of false and bad words about me and about my faith and about the search that the FSB made. This video report was probably a custom-made work of the FSB, as it contained search scenes, material that only the FSB could have. Since article 49 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation clearly states that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty, I believe that such behavior on the part of the FSB is a vivid expression of psychological terror, which they probably often use. So yes, Your Honor, I always feel that I have already been convicted in advance and that nothing depends on me. During this trial, I heard many times about extremism, but to be honest, it is very difficult for me to see and understand how it all relates to me or other Jehovah's peaceful Witnesses. Maybe some people don't understand Jehovah's Witnesses and what they tell others from the Bible. Maybe someone feels that it's different from what they're used to hearing about God. But it's not extremism to tell others about what is written in the Word of God and help them understand what is written in this book. On the contrary, it is an expression of love and care for neighbors. Jehovah's Witnesses value the Bible very much and believe that this letter is from a loving father to his children - from God to all our people. From the Bible you can learn about God and his intention. The Bible says that the name of God is Jehovah. This name is found more than 7,000 times in the original text, and this is proof that God wants us to use his name. His name "Jehovah" means "I will be what I want to be." And it means that nothing can stop him from fulfilling his intentions or helping those who love him with all their heart. Jesus also said in the prayer "Our Father": "Holines be your name." The Bible says that only God we should worship, as He is the Creator of everything and since only He is the Almighty God. Jesus Christ is not God, but he is the son of God. He was sent by God to earth to preach about the truth, to teach us about his Heavenly Father and give his life as an atoning sacrifice for all of us people. Believing in Jesus is very important, as he is our Savior and he shows us the way to eternal life, but he is not God, but the Son of God. He is a perfect example for us humans, and he showed us how we should behave with other people and how best to use our lives. Jesus taught us all in the prayer "Our Father" to pray: "Yes, your kingdom will come." The kingdom of God is a heavenly government that consists of Jesus as a king and his 144,000 co-rulers. This is stated in the Bible. The kingdom of God is the tool that God will use to cleanse the earth and turn it into the paradise that was at the beginning, and to help humanity come to perfection. Under the reign of the Kingdom of God, diseases and death will be removed, and all people will obey God's laws and live in peace with each other. For many, it may sound like a utopia, but I want to emphasize that all this is written in the Bible. This was not invented by Jehovah's Witnesses. The Bible also talks about things that can be new to many, for example, that God is one and is not part of the Trinity. The word "trinity" or the doctrine of it is not in the Bible at all. The Bible teaches that the holy spirit is God's power, not personality. That Jesus is the only mediator between God and people, and therefore it is important to worship God not with the help of a picture or statue, since God does not like such worship. The Bible also says that our people do not have an immortal soul that lives on after death. When a person dies, then he ceases to exist. This means that the dead do not suffer and that death is like sleep, a state of non-existence. All the dead are in God's memory, and in Paradise God will raise them back to life. And that's a great idea. The Bible does not teach us that good people will be in heaven and that evil people will be in fiery hell. There is no doctrine of fiery hell in the Bible, and the word that is used ("hell") simply means " grave". God does not want to torment people, including evil people. The Bible says that God is a loving God who does not test us with evil. That's right, the Bible says that evil people will be removed and that the righteous will inherit the earth and live on it forever. But evil people will be removed by God, not by Jehovah's Witnesses or other people. Only God will determine who he considers evil or righteous, that is, neither Jehovah's Witnesses nor other people will determine it. God wants people to get accurate knowledge about him and his intention and what kind of worship he wants. This knowledge can be obtained if you read and study the Bible, and Jehovah's Witnesses are very happy to help others gain more knowledge about God and his Word, the Bible. The Regional Court in Orel liquidated the Local Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Eagle", which is a legal entity with which the majority of Jehovah's Witnesses in the city of Orel have nothing to do with, and with which I also have nothing to do. But the FSB believes that this court decision is a law that prohibits me from believing in God and which prohibits me from discussing my faith with other people. This understanding of the FSB contradicts the Russian Constitution. There is no law or court decision that prohibits someone from being a Jehovah's Witness, or that prohibits someone from sharing the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses with others, or that prohibits Jehovah's Witnesses from talking to each other about the Bible and other spiritual matters. Such laws or court decisions do not exist, so I have not violated anything or done anything illegal. I do not plead guilty, and I believe that the accusation against me is illegal. The human right to profess one's religion has now been declared extremist. I don't understand at all how you can see something criminal in my actions. Unfortunately, history repeats itself. In the USSR, Jehovah's Witnesses were also in prison. They were accused of anti-Soviet activities only because they professed the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses. Now in Russia in 2019, but Jehovah's Witnesses are in prison again. They are persecuted and accused as extremists only because they profess the religion as Jehovah's Witnesses. Calling Jehovah's Witnesses extremists is completely ridiculous and it has nothing to do with reality. As expert Ivanenko said during this court session, "Jehovah's Witnesses don't even smell of extremism." These actions and accusations against Jehovah's Witnesses are a direct persecution of faith and are an attempt to eradicate this religion in Russia under the guise of the fight against extremism. Jehovah's Witnesses are peaceful people who desire the best for all. They do not cause violence or incite hatred towards others. They do not pose a threat to society, on the contrary, they try to behave honestly, comply with the laws of the country, pay taxes, keep the city clean and help their neighbors and other people to the best of their ability. It is very sad that history is now repeating itself, but it should not be so in the 21st century in a democratic, legal society. Your Honor, you could stop all this and make sure that history does not repeat itself again. It's no secret that your decision will set a precedent and will matter not only for me, but also for all the other 175,000 Jehovah's Witnesses who live in Russia. Therefore, I ask you to investigate the evidence, follow the voice of your conscience and make sure that justice prevails. The prosecution wants me to get 6 and a half years in prison. But for what? No way! Six and a half years for being an honest person who obeys the laws of the country. Six and a half years for being a believer who loves his neighbor as himself. Six and a half years for being a good neighbor, I participated in the construction of a playground. Six and a half years for being a Jehovah's Witness who loves the Russian people. Six and a half years for paying taxes and being legally registered as a private entrepreneur. Six and a half years for never committing any criminal acts. Six and a half years for regularly participating in city subbotniks. Six and a half years for loving Russia and its culture. Six and a half years for observing and using Art. 28 of the Russian Constitution. Six and a half years - no way! It's definitely unfair. It's absolutely stupid and crazy! And as President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin said recently that "it's complete nonsense to haunt Jehovah's Witnesses," and that he would appeal to the President of the Supreme Court about it. And the fact that "it is completely absurd to persecute Jehovah's Witnesses, I completely agree with this." Therefore, your honor, the only solution in this matter with which I will agree: justification, release, apology and compensation. I don't agree to less! Thank you."