A friend of Bellator fighter Usman Nurmagomedov, Kamal Idrisov, did not commit actions that pose a danger to police officers during the incident at the Makhachkala airport on November 11 this year, which follows from the protocol of the confrontation with the police. In addition, the information that the police identified the driver of the car in Nurmagomedov is not true – they could not give a definite answer, and the actions of the police officer who collided with the car of Nurmagomedov and Idrisov are illegal. This, in particular, is stated in the statement of the lawyer of Nurmagomedov and Idrisov – Sultan Kalaev.
On November 11, the car that Nurmagomedov and Idrisov were in hit a police officer at the checkpoint at the entrance to the Makhachkala airport, after which he fell. Friends were in a hurry to take a flight to Moscow. Upon arrival at Sheremetyevo, they were detained. Later it became known that Idrisov was driving. On November 15, he was placed under house arrest for two months. Then the Soviet Court of Makhachkala changed the preventive measure against Idrisov, sending him to a pre-trial detention center until January 11.
However, as it became known to “SE”, on December 2, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Dagestan overturned the decision of the Soviet Court. Now Idrisov is subject to the initially chosen measure of restraint in the form of house arrest.
“Given the systematic nature of unsubstantiated publications in various media that provide distorted information about the case, I would like to comment on several issues based solely on objective evidence,” Kalaev noted. – As you can see, the provision of distorted information occurs in several directions that have one thing in common: the ability of this information to provide artificial resonance, which increases content views.
Thus, the media emphasizes that Idrisov Kamal and Nurmagomedov Usman did not stop at the checkpoint, “with special cynicism they knocked down a policeman, fences” and almost drove up to the plane in this car, and after the incident they did not even apologize to police officers. Moreover, information is being circulated that the police identified Nurmagomedov as the person who was driving the vehicle at the time of the incident.
First, I would like to note that given the activity in social networks, it should be clear to everyone that the investigation will be carried out under special control, and we already feel it. Even the head of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation flew to Dagestan.
Secondly, we all saw the video footage from the scene. According to these records, it is obvious that no one knocked down the employee. The video, filmed with the chest camera of one of the police officers, clearly shows that the car driven by Idrisov, having approached the police post, stopped, and after a gesture of the policeman in the direction of travel, he tried to go around the car in front and the barrier on the left side close to the bump stop, to which Another police officer approached. Naturally, in such a situation, Idrisov’s attention was directed to the left. Passing the bump stop, the car had just begun to pick up speed, and it was at that moment that the victim ran out from behind another police officer and, in fact, threw himself onto the right side of the passing car.
As follows from the protocol of the confrontation with the police officers who were on duty, Idrisov did not commit any actions that posed a danger to the police officers.
This circumstance testifies to the erroneous qualification of Idrisov’s actions under Art. 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since the subjective side of the corpus delicti provided for by this article is characterized by the direct intent of a person to harm the health of a police officer.
The second point where the distortion of facts occurs is that the media present the situation as if Idrisov and Nurmagomedov fled the scene of the crime.
Obviously, a person who has committed a crime and wants to hide will not go to the airport, where there are a lot of cameras on every corner. It should be noted that Idrisov, who understood that his actions could be regarded as disobedience to the lawful demand of a police officer, upon reaching the airport, even before the plane took off, asked his acquaintances to come to the post and explain the reason that they did not stop.
The third point where the misrepresentation occurs is that the media presents the information as if, after hitting a police officer, the guys did not even apologize or offer compensation.
This information is also incorrect, since it is reliably known that, at the request of Idrisov, friends and adult relatives immediately arrived at the police post and apologized on behalf of the guys for what had happened, and also offered any necessary assistance. Nobody was going to hide, moreover, it was the relatives who arrived at the post who told the police that Idrisov Kamal and Nurmagomedov Usman were in the car. This information is corroborated by the testimony of the police officers themselves. The victim refused compensation for the harm, citing the fact that it was a misunderstanding and he had no claims against the guys.
The fourth point where the misrepresentation of facts occurs is that the media present the information as if the police identified Nurmagomedov as the person who was driving at the time of the above actions. In fact, the police officers could not unambiguously indicate who exactly was driving the car, and during the investigative experiment it was proved that not a single officer could see the faces of those sitting inside the car due to the blackout of the windows.
Returning to the qualification of the event itself and Idrisov’s actions, given the video recordings, I think any lawyer will say that in order to hold a person accountable under Art. 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it must be understood that these actions should have been committed with direct intent, which is not seen in this case.
In addition, it is important to note that the employee in question was without reflective clothing and could not enter the roadway. Moreover, it is not part of his job description to stop vehicles. Thus, the actions of this police officer were illegal. In fact, the actions reflected in the video recording could only be qualified as an administrative offense, disobedience to the lawful demand of a police officer in accordance with Art. 19.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.
Here, apparently, the resonance factor of the case played when the investigating authority, in a hurry, first opened a criminal case, and then became a hostage of its own decision, which it could not cancel due to the pressure exerted on it.
We do not at all try to justify the actions of young people, they themselves understand that they were wrong, but at the same time we have the right to count on legal accusation and punishment. We are still waiting for the investigation to put aside emotions, establish all the circumstances relevant to the case and give a legal and objective assessment of what happened.”
