Homel: psychiatrist got imprisoned for occasionally witnessing an arson

Three years of investigation, dozens of court hearings, dozens of complaints to all instances, 13 months in prison and eventual acquittal. This is the story of a Homel psychiatrist which started in the summer of 2008 in Homel. An unidentified person set fire to a garage in the Navabelitski district of Homel several times. Rescuers and the police arrived each time, but failed to detain the arsonist.

Instead, they detained there a psychiatrist, Yauhen Dzedushkin, who lived nearby and came to look at the accident. His misfortune was that, at the time of the fire he was drunk, and the police detained him. Soon afterwards the local press published the information that a Pyromaniac psychiatrist was arrested for the arsons. The administration of the psychiatric hospital immediately fired him to get read of the “dangerous criminal”.

"Formally, the reason for dismissal was that I was not at work because I had been beaten by the police for the arsons and felt bad,’ says Mr. Dzedushkin.

Now we are talking with the ex-convict about the story of his conviction and acquittal.

INVESTIGATION: "When I was arrested for the first time, the investigator immediately offered - you confess to the crime and we help you by giving a short prison term and not putting you in the pre-trial prison. Naturally, I refused. After all, I was innocent. The investigation had a problem – there was no evidence of my guilt, that’s why my confession was very important to them. Six weeks later the investigation allegedly found a witness who had allegedly seen and heard everything. It is interesting that this person is registered in the police as an offender. They must have exerted pressure on him, and he gave a false testimony.  Naturally, the police need high levels of crime detection, that’s why they were so eager to prove my guilt.

The investigator put me before a choice – I could either confess to having committed the crime or be put in the pre-trial prison the next day. The following day I came to them with some belongings and told them to put me there. I remember that my lawyer looked through the criminal case and told the investigator: "I'm sure this person will be acquitted. And although
you can arrange everything here, we will go up to Minsk, and the Supreme Court won’t ignore this case”. The investigator told me that I would have to serve a prison term irrespective of all efforts of my counsel.

It was really so. In February 2009, the Navabelitski District Court of Homel found Yauhen Dzedushkin guilty of the arson and sentenced him to 4 years of imprisonment though he pleaded innocent and there was no evidence of his guilt.

TRIALS. "At the level of the district courts and the regional one I have the impression that they cover one another. I have been acquitted after all, that’s why I have no moral right to say that the Belarusian justice is evil, but in fact it's scary - at first I was imprisoned for 4 years for something I did not commit, and then – was acquitted. I was lucky that I was a bit versed in the codes and had a lawyer who wrote the complaint, I helped my mother, and it is no secret that this all this – complaints, lawyers, etc. – costs money. It’s well that we had it, but what about those people who have no money, are deprived of legal aid and therefore cannot oppose this system?

I think that I was just lucky, that someone in the Supreme Court reviewed my case objectively. But again - what did it cost? How much time and money was lost to all these appeals? Moreover, my penalty was changed to personal restraint. It means that if I was in prison, I could have been released on parole, because amnesties were declared at that time. That’s why many other people think that there’s no need to struggle, because you will sooner serve a prison term than get the justice."

On 24 March the judicial board of the Homel Regional Court acquitted the formed doctor and. Now there arises the question who will answer for putting a 12-month-long imprisonment of an innocent man.

Of course, nobody wants to take the responsibility. Therefore, as it has become known recently, the procuracy disagreed with the verdict of the regional court and filed a protest.

Human Rights Chronicle