What happened that night? (Note: this image, by Flickr user chonzno01 for CC-usage, , is unrelated to the trial of Yevgeniy Zhovtis.)

Translation of Sorge’s post.

Discrepancies in the media reports about the criminal case against the well-known human rights activist, along with the contradictory results of the expert examinations trigger concerns of the general public.

On July 27, one of the web-sites reported that Yevgeniy Zhovtis, the widely known human rights activist and the director of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law, was involved in a traffic accident. The anonymous message alleged that Zhovtis was driving drunk at a high speed when he hit Moldabayev, who was standing at a bus-stop on the high-way, whereupon Zhovtis then tried to escape from the scene and was rude to the police squad.

In fact, at the scene of the accident the police determined that the vehicle was passing 1.5 meters from the roadside, where no bus-stops exist. The blood test made right after the accident determined that no alcohol was found in Zhovtis’ blood. As for Moldabayev, his relatives stated that on the day of his death he was drunk. Zhovtis brought his apologies to the relatives of the deceased, rendered material assistance and support in funeral arrangment. Moldabayev’s relatives do not have any claims to Zhovtis. It was determined that the speed limits were not exceeded, but being struck blind by the lights of the cars moving at the distance of 30-40 m from the opposite direction Zhovtis could not pull up sharp and avoid hitting the pedestrian, who was walking with his back to the traffic on the highway, instead of the roadside.

There were criminal proceedings along with investigative actions started on July 27 on the traffic accident. The second forensic toxicological examination was made on July 28. Its results allegedly detected the presence of insignificant amount (0.42 ppm) of alcohol in Yevgeniy’s blood, but the information about this examination and its results was actually distributed only on August 17. Despite the fact that presence of alcohol in the blood in such insignificant quantities is not indicative of any alcohol intoxication, the mass-media put the emphasis on “detection of alcohol”, which reveals that attempts to generate negative public attitude to the human rights activist.

Meanwhile, two weeks after the accident, on August 10, there were the results of the forensic chemical expertise disclosed. These results demonstrated that no alcohol was found in the blood of the deceased, which is contradictory to the statements of his relatives and accident witnesses.

The preliminary investigation was finished on August 15. Zhovtis was presented the accusation in accordance with Article 296, p. 2 of RK Criminal Code (violation of traffic regulations resulted in death of a person by negligence), which implicates up to 5 years prison sentence. The same day he signed the written undertaking not to leave the place of residence. On August 16 the Moldabayev’s relatives expressed that they wish to submit the statement declaring absence of claims to Zhovtis. At the briefing held by MIA on August 17 it was reported that in accordance with the results of the vehicle technical expert examination, which were contradictory to the accident report made at the scene, Zhovtis, supposedly, could technically avoid hitting the pedestrian.

The defenders of the human rights activist have doubted the results of these “delayed” examinations and now are preparing the appropriate petitions. These criminal investigation discrepancies and inconsistencies, intentional disinformation and contradictory results of the expert examinations only prove the fact that the government attempts to apply pressure on the respected rights advocate.

As to the mysterious message, this was clearly an act of disinformation and was soon removed from the website.  It is still unclear who was behind the act.