This day occupies pages 95 through 142 of Volume II of the
transcript.
Today the two officials who worked the case from beginning
to end testify. They are also the only
survivors from among all those who rejected the ritual murder theory.
A witness with information about Kozachenko and the forged
letter fails to show up, although he took the oath. Vipper disingenuously pretends that because
the name is spelled Kazachenko, it is about somebody completely unknown to the
court. This is false.
- The indictment spells
Kozachenko’s name Kazachenko and from the text, it is clear that this is
the man who helped forge Beilis’ name to the letter.
- In the indictment both
spellings are used.
- The Kazachenko spelling is
used on day 4 with direct reference to the letter.
- The deposition of
Kozachenko was read on day 7, and in the transcript his name is spelled
Kazachenko.
- This same individual, with
the name spelled the same way, is discussed with Dudman on day 10.
Ivanov says an interesting thing while Grigorevich-Barsky is
questioning him. Grigorevich-Barsky
points out that at the time Rudzinsky confessed to Shechko about the murder,
Brazul-Brushkovsky’s article accusing him had not yet come out, so that there
were no public accusations against him yet.
Ivanov says, “but the prisoners knew.”
What did they know? That there
were accusations against him? Krasovsky
could have told him that in 1911. Did
the prisoners know that he had committed the murder – like Krymovsky – or did
they only know about accusations?
Today Ivanov puts the flyers to bed. They were distributed at the funeral, showing
that the anti-Semites wanted Jewish blood before there could be any proof of
ritual murder. Ivanov was brought a copy
by a policeman, and authenticated a copy shown him by the defense. He identified Nikolay Andreevich Pavlovich, a
member of the Black Hundreds, as the distributor.
Yablonsky summarizes Vera: “When she tells the truth she
lies and if she talks in her sleep, she’s probably lying then, too.” He gets a laugh by saying that Brazul
shouldn’t have set the meeting with Vera for a restaurant, because it could
have compromised her (spoiled her reputation) in the eyes of the world. But this is day 19 and if Yablonsky missed
her testimony, he wouldn’t have known about all her lies or how she attacked
that little cat Chernyakova in the middle of the courtroom.
Late in the day Maklakov points out that the government has
mismanaged the entire case, without putting it exactly in those words. If nothing about Cheberyak has anything to do
with Yushchinsky’s murder, then no testimony about Cheberyak should have been
allowed in the case. And since the
government has admitted that information, and also that Cheberyak was associated
with a gang of thieves, in fact with a large one, then it is pertinent to the
case how gangs of thieves act. The
question Boldyrev is trying to keep out is whether Krasovsky has knowledge of
any given case – any set of facts – associated with how thieves deal with
betrayal. Boldyrev pretends that this is
a case of expertise and should be asked of the forensic physicians, but what he
is trying to do is salvage some last shred of pretense that the case has
anything to do with Beilis at all, which the preceding 18 days of testimony have
gradually reduced to simply having him in the courtroom.
Today the prosecution tries to claim that Margolin was lying
about being in Kharkov at all by deliberately misreading the hotel register. If Margolin wasn’t in Kharkov,
then he couldn’t have been involved in any offer of 40,000 to Vera, which would have discredited both him and Gruzenberg whom Margolin helped bring in as the lead attorney in Beilis’
defense.
Ivanov gets caught with his certificates down. First he weasel-words an answer to suggest
that he didn’t find something he was looking for, when he never claimed he
looked for it. Then he admits he asked
the police for certificates as to whether Brazul’s, Vygranov’s, and Cheberyak’s
presence in Kharkov was registered with the police, but he didn’t ask about
Margolin, so his claim that he didn’t get that information also falls to the
ground.
Without realizing it, Zamyslovsky points out that it was an
error to let Golubev testify at all relative to the record of examination of
the locality. The record is an official
document and cannot be questioned without evidence of its incorrectness. The only evidence Golubev had was his own
unwitnessed examination at a different point in time, which is irrelevant. The judge told Gruzenberg he could ask
Fenenko about it. Zamyslovsky is out of
order and the judge eventually says so.
Judge: Fyodor Boldyrev
Prosecution:
Criminal
Prosecutor, Oscar Vipper
Civil
Prosecutor Georgy Zamyslovsky
Private
Civil Prosecutor Aleksey Shmakov
Defense:
Oscar
Gruzenberg
Nikolay Karabchevsky
Dmitry Grigorevich-Barsky
Alexandr Zarudny
Vasily Maklakov
Page
|
||||
Witness
|
Notes
|
Transcript
|
Translation
|
Statement
|
Ekaterina Maslash
|
Defends Beilis’ character
|
95
|
1757
|
1
|
A.A. Yablonsky
|
Writer
At Rootsa with Vera
|
97
|
1761
|
92
|
Voitenko
|
Non-appearing, illegal
Would have helped prove Kozachenko’s letter a forgery
|
104
|
1772
|
280
|
Pavel A. Ivanov
|
Lt. Col. of Gendarmes
(secret police)
Verifies Kozachenko police agent
Authenticates Pavlovich’s flyers
|
104
119
|
1773
1806
|
291
958
|
Arnold Davidovich Margolin
|
Recalled about Kharkov trip
|
118
|
1804
|
934
|
Vasily Ivanovich Fenenko
|
Forensic investigator
In 1911
|
120
|
1807
|
983
|
Lashkarev
|
Deputy prosecutor
|
127
|
1822
|
1210
|
Nikolay Aleksandrovich Krasovsky
|
Re-called
Testifies about tree carving
|
132
|
1832
|
1301
|
© Patricia Jo Heil, 2013-2018 All Rights
Reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment