The witness despite the defense's questions that he did not He could see lights, testified that he saw lights, and he said:
"A. Everything was seen in a split second.
Q. So if everything happened in a split second like you said and you didn't see lanes, how can you tell me who swerved to whom?
A. I didn't say who swerved, I said that the car coming in front of me made a sharp deviation and hit the car in front of me.
Q. Who swerved from the path, you can't say?
A. I was driving a car and I didn't exactly look where the separation line was, what I saw was
I'll tell you that the vehicle coming in front made a sharp turn and hit the car in front of me." (See his testimony of 8 January 2025, p. 38, paras. 6-12).
Prosecution Witness No. 9 - Sgt. Vladislav Pevzner
As part of his testimony in the main interrogation, the following documents were submitted:
Document PThe witness prepared it, submitted and marked as P/21A, P/21B (2 pages). In the document there is a picture of the underbelly of a vehicle involved in which the measurement was made, and it is recorded:
"On 31/03/2024 I arrived at the police yard "Drag Me" and conducted an inspection of the Kia No. 1 ... The vehicle was lifted in the air and I measured the distance from the right side to the beginning of the damage in the belly (in the part connecting the triangles) - 0.92 The overall width of the vehicle - 1.58 meters."
Document Pi. A location calculation made by the witness, submitted and marked A/22. This is a calculation of the "location" of vehicle B (the vehicle involved) in its lane at the time of the collision.
Memorandum of Completion Prepared by the Witness of Day 21.25. Submitted and marked A/23. From this memorandum it appears that the measurement made by B/21 in the underside of the vehicle involved was made from the right side of the damage to the beginning. The measurement made on B/22 was made in the vehicle involved from the left side of the damage to the beginning of the damage, and thus the position of the vehicle involved in its lane at the time of impact was calculated. The examiner notes that there is a contradiction between the two documents and he does not remember what the measurement was actually made. Therefore, the examiner determined that the meaning described in document A/21 is that the vehicle involved should be moved from the place where B/22 is located by 26 cm to the left in the lane.
The interrogation of a defendant conducted by"The witness dated April 3,2024 was filed and marked, P/24 (2 leaves, 4 pages).
Memorandum drawn up by the examiner dated 44.24. With regard to the materials he received from the defendant, P/25 was submitted and marked.
A letter given by the defendant to the examiner Vladislav dated April 3,2024, was filed and marked as P/26. The letter recorded
The following :
"After the interrogation and after you told me that there was a witness who drove behind the other vehicle who did not
It is known how far away he claimed to have seen me deviate 3 times, which would have sounded unbelievable
Maybe I drove to the scene and filmed the scene of the accident and I am attaching the videos for you
In them, it can be clearly seen that even in daylight (and unlike at the time of the accident, when there were conditions
Thinks (90)L. - Darkness - A.H.B.) And heavy rain There is no such possibility and there is no field of vision in the place
The Accident Cancellation of administrative fine 8.1 on Route 3415, which is the site of the accident, there is no possibility that a driver will succeed
To see a car coming in front of you, let alone a car that has arrived. More according to the scene of the accident, the testimony of
The witness is illogical and impossible., and I would like to check if it has a connection with the other vehicle to
Which of his passengers. As you can see in this video there is a bend to the right and then the road straightens
And you can't see me in a deviation, certainly not in the dark or in the rain. The testimony of the witness is not
Logical and inconsistent with the terrain. I suggest that you do an experiment with it that will explain the
The illogic of his testimony because you think I'm guilty."