UKRAINIAN COURT ORDERS INVESTIGATION OF JOE BIDEN:

Knowing the truth about the Kennedy Assassination is understanding America today.

Moderators: Bob, Phil Dragoo, Dealey Joe, kenmurray, dankbaar

UKRAINIAN COURT ORDERS INVESTIGATION OF JOE BIDEN:

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:34 am

Thursday
03.05.2020
9:34 p.m.,
Chicago, Illinois time:

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

BEST REGARDS TO EVERYBODY.

I sincerely doubt that "We the People..." will ever learn the truth about the activities of Joe and
Hunter Biden, and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Just as much as the total facts and truth will never come out about JFK, MX, MLK, and RFK, and the
Oklahoma Bombing and 09.11.2001.

As always, I strongly recommend that you first read, research, and study material completely yourself
about a Subject Matter, and then formulate your own Opinions and Theories.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts, or writings
on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFK Researchers
who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.


Raw Conservative Opinions

Home Politics Ukrainian Court Throws Wrench Into Joe Biden’s 2020 Election Plans
POLITICS
Ukrainian Court Throws Wrench Into Joe Biden’s 2020 Election Plans
March 5, 2020 14555

Authored by John Solomon via JustTheNews.com,
A Ukrainian court has ordered an investigation into whether Joe Biden violated any laws when he forced the March 2016 firing of the country’s chief prosecutor.

The ruling could revive scrutiny of Hunter Biden’s lucrative relationship with an energy firm in that corruption-plagued country just as the former vice president’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is surging after a lackluster start.

Former Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, who has long alleged he was fired because he would not stop investigating the Burisma Holdings firm that employed Hunter Biden, secured the ruling last month. Ukrainian officials confirmed the State Bureau of Investigation has since complied and initiated the probe.

The Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv ruled last month that Shokin’s lawyers had provided sufficient evidence to warrant a probe and “obliged the authorized officials of the State Bureau of Investigation” to accept the ex-prosecutor’s complaint and “start pre-trial investigation of the reported data,” according to an official English translation of the ruling provided by Shokin’s attorney.

scribd.scribd.scribd.scribd.
 
PECHERSKYI DISTRICT COURT OF KYIV
01601, Kyiv, Volodymyrska str., 15
web:
http://pc.ki.court.gov.ua
,
e-mail:
inbox@pc.ki.court.gov.ua
 
Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System of Ukraine – 080 800 501 492
07.02.2020
Registration
!
 757/4597/20-c
Attorney-at-law
OLEKSANDR IVANOVYCH TELESHETSKIY
01032, Kyiv, Saksahanskoho, str., 112-B, office 22, tel./fax: (044) 235 08 42, 235 06 97
State Bureau of Investigation
01032, Kyiv, Petliury Symona, str., 15
The Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv sends to your address a certified copy of the order of the
investigating judge of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv of 06.02.2020 for information/
execution.
 Addition
: a certified copy of the order of 06.02.2020
Investigating Judge
of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv_______________ I.V. Lytvynova
(signature)
Executor: Assistant Judge – Ye.I. Chepiha

Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv
*260647568022*1*1
COPY
PECHERSKYI DISTRICT COURT OF KYIV
Case
!
 757/4597/20-

DECISION
IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE
On 06 February, 2020, the investigating Judge of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv I.V.
Lytvynova, at the
clerk of the court
 S.M. Vynnyk, having considered in the open court session in
the courtroom in Kyiv, the court proceedings on the complaint of the attorney-at-law O.I.
Teleshetskiy acting in the interests of V.M. Shokin on the inaction of the authorized persons of
the State Bureau of Investigation is the failure to enter information into the Unified Register of
Pre-trial Investigations after receiving an application of a criminal offence (crime),
FOUND:
On 31.01.2020 the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv received a complaint from
the attorney-at-law O.I. Teleshetskiy, representative of the victim, of V.M. Shokin, that was
transferred to the investigating judge I.V. Lytvynova on the same day, in accordance with Article
303 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine, for the inaction of the authorized officials of
the State Bureau of Investigation with regard to the failure to enter information about a criminal
offence into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations after receiving an application of
28.01.2020 registration
!
 763VMI.
The applicant did not receive information that the data on the application of
28.01.2020 registration
!
 763VMI was entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial
Investigations, and therefore the inaction of the State Bureau of Investigation on this fact was
appealed to the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv.

The person who filed the complaint did not appear at the court session, and the
 place and time of the complaint's proper consideration was duly submitted through the court
office in his absence.

A representative of the State Bureau of Investigation did not appear at the court
session, and did not inform the court about the place and time of the proper consideration of the
complaint, nor about the reasons for his failure to appear.

According to the rule of paragraph 4 Article 107 of the CPC of Ukraine there was
no technical fixation of the complaint by the investigating judge.

Paragraph 3 Article 306 of the CPC of Ukraine provides that the absence of an investigator or a
prosecutor is not an obstacle to the consideration of a complaint.

According to the provisions of Article 26 of the CPC of Ukraine, the parties to
criminal proceedings are free to exercise their right within the limits and in the manner
prescribed by the Code.


 
 In the light of these provisions of the law and taking into account the principle of
optionality, the court considered that it was possible to take a decision on the merits of the
complaint in the absence of persons.

After examining the complaint and examining the materials of the proceedings, the
investigating judge, in his or her inner conviction, which is based on a comprehensive, complete
and impartial study of all the circumstances of the criminal proceedings, guided by the law,
having assessed each argument from the point of view of relevance, admissibility and credibility,
and the totality of the evidence gathered – from the point of view of sufficiency and
interconnectedness for the adoption of the relevant procedural decision comes to the following
conclusion.

According to paragraph 2 Article 19 of the Constitution of Ukraine, bodies of state
 power and their officials are obliged to act only on the basis, within the limits of authority and in
the manner envisaged by the Constitution and the laws of Ukraine.

An exhaustive list of decisions, actions or omissions of an investigator or
 prosecutor which may be appealed against during a pre-trial investigation, as defined in
 paragraph 1 Article 303 of the CPC of Ukraine. In particular, according to c. I paragraph I Article
303 of the CPC of Ukraine, the inaction of the investigator or the prosecutor, which consists in
failing to provide information on the criminal offence to the URPI, may be appealed against
during the pre-trial proceedings.

The court proceedings established that on 28.01.2020 Shokin V.M. has submitted
to the State Bureau of Investigation an application on the commission of a criminal offence, that
was registered by the body of pre-trial investigation on 01.28.2020 registration
!
 763VMI.
However, according to paragraph 1 Article 214 of the CPC of Ukraine, an
investigator, a prosecutor immediately, but not later than 24 hours after filing an application,
notification of a criminal offence or after independently identifying him from any source of
circumstances that may testify to a criminal offence is obliged to provide relevant information to
the Unified registry of pre-trial investigations was investigated, investigations initiated and 24
hours after such information had been entered to provide the applicant with an extract from the
Unified registry of pre-trial investigations". The investigator who will conduct the pre-trial
investigation is determined by the head of the pre-trial investigation body.

With regard to the content of the said norm, the obligation to adopt and register an
application or report on criminal offences rests with the investigator, procurator and other
officials authorized to adopt them. The acceptance and registration of an application or
communication concerning a criminal offence may not be refused, regardless of whether the
investigation of the facts concerning the communication concerns criminal offences under the
territorial jurisdiction or the procedural competence of the body to which an application or report
was submitted.

In addition, paragraph 2 Article 60 of the CPC of Ukraine provides that the
applicant of the masses of the right to receive from the body to which he filed an application, a
document confirming its acceptance and registration, an extract from the Unified Register of Pre-
trial Investigations.

In a report of a criminal offence, the applicant provides a summary of the
circumstances that may indicate the commission of criminal offences and the preliminary
qualification of the offence.

Taking this into account, the court concludes that it is necessary to oblige officials
of the State Bureau of Investigation to enter information into the Unified Register of Pre-trial
Investigations in accordance with the complaint of V.M. Shokin about a criminal offence in the
manner and within the time limits envisaged in Article 214 of the CPC of Ukraine, since it was
established at the court hearing that, in violation of the above provision, as of the time of
consideration of the complaint, information from the complaint of 28.01.2020, registration
!
 
763VMI was not entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations, and the
investigation had not been started.

According to Article 535 of the CPC of Ukraine, the bodies executing the court's
decision inform the court that issued the decision about its implementation.
According to Articles 60, 214, 303, 305, 306, 307, 309 of the CPC of Ukraine, the investigating
judge,DECIDED:

To satisfy the complaint of the applicant attorney-at-law O.I. Teleshetskiy acting in
the interests of V.M. Shokin on the inaction of the authorized persons of the State Bureau of
Investigation, which consists in not entering information in the Unified register of pre-trial
investigations after receiving a criminal complaint
To oblige the authorized officials of the State Bureau of Investigation to enter the
data from the application of V.M. Shokin
!
 763VMI of 28.01.2020 on committing criminal
offences into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations and to start pre-trial investigation of
the reported data.

To oblige the official who entered the data into the Unified Register of Pre-trial
Investigations to provide the applicant with an extract from the Unified Register of Pre-trial
Investigations in 24 hours from the date of entry of such data and inform the Pecherskyi District
Court of Kyiv. The applicant shall submit a copy of the extract from the Uniform Register of
Pre-trial Investigations to the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv.

The decision of the investigating judge shall not be subject to appeal.
Investigating judge _____________________ I.V. Lytvynova
(signature)

Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv
*260647568022*1*1
*Stamp / AS PER ORIGINAL / Judge – I.V. Lytvynova /
clerk of the court
 – S.M. Vynnyk *

The ruling does not mention Biden by name, but court filings by Shokin’s lawyers that led to the decision show that the former prosecutor had alleged “the commission of a criminal offense against him by Joseph Biden, a citizen of the United States of America, in Ukraine and abroad: interference in the activities of a law enforcement officer.”

scribd.scribd.scribd.scribd.scribd.
 
Attorney-at-law
OLEKSANDR IVANOVYCH TELESHETSKIY
Certificate of right to practice law
 000173 of 28.07.17
01032, Kyiv, Saksahanskoho, str., 112-B, office 22, tel./fax: (044) 235 08 42, 235 06 97
mobile tel.: 4.38 (050) 671 71 92. E-mail:
teleshetskiy.oleksandr@gmail.com
 
11 February, 2020, original
#
 307-
$
 / 00299/2019-3144
To
the Director
of the State Bureau of Investigation
Iryna Valentynivna Venediktova
01032, Kyiv,Symona Petliury, str, 15
in the interest of the victim Shokin Viktor Mykolaiovych,
born on 04.11.1952
REQUEST FOR LEGAL PROCEDURE
On 28 January 2020, Shokin Viktor Mykolaiovych, born on 4 November 1952, filed an
application to the SBI concerning the commission of a criminal offence against him by Joseph
Biden, a citizen of the United States of America, in Ukraine and abroad: interference in the
activities of a law enforcement officer, that is punishable under paragraph 2 Article 343, of the
Criminal Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the “CC of Uktaine”).
This application has been accepted by the Office of the State Bureau of Investigation and
registered under registration
#
 763VMI of 28 January 2020.
Taking into account the fact that the investigators of the State Bureau of Investigation
were not provided with the requirements of Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of
Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the “CPC of Ukraine”), information about the criminal
offense according to the application of V.M. Shokin about the crime, within 24 hours from its
receipt, was not entered in the (Unified Registry of pre-trial investigations (hereinafter referred
to as the “URPI/YERDR (original), on 30 October, 2019, his representative filed a complaint to
the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv about the inaction of the investigator, which consists in
failing to provide information about a criminal offence to the URPI (original
#
 307-
$
 / 00299 /
2019-3104).
As a result of this complaint consideration, the investigating judge of the Pecherskyi
District Court of Kyiv I.V. Lytvynova, on 06.02.2020, has issued a decision on its satisfaction in
case
#
 757/4597/20-
$
 and obliged the authorized officials of the State Bureau of Investigation
to enter into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations the information from the V.M.
Shokin application under registration
#
 763VMI of 28 January 2020 about the commission of
criminal offences and to start a pre-trial investigation of the reported data.
According to paragraph 2 Article 21 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine
(hereinafter referred to as the “CPC of Ukraine”), the judgments and rulings of the court which
has entered into force, in the manner prescribed by the CPC of Ukraine, are binding and subject
to unconditional enforcement throughout the territory of Ukraine.
Article 369 of the CPC of Ukraine defines a court order as a type of judgment.
The provision of Article 129-1 of the Constitution of Ukraine establishes that a judgment
is binding. The state shall enforce the judgment in the manner prescribed by the law. The court
shall monitor the enforcement of the judgment.
 
LAW ASSOCIATION “LESHCHENKO, DOROSHEHKO AND PARTNERS”
Stamp:
 /State Bureau of Investigation
 Income no.4244-20
 From 11.02.2020

According to paragraph 4 Article 38 of the CPC of Ukraine the pre-trial investigation
 body is obliged to take all measures provided by law to ensure the effectiveness of the pre-trial
investigation.

It is determined with paragraph 3 Article 93 of the CPC of Ukraine that the initiation by
the defence party, the victim, the representative of the legal entity in charge of the proceedings,
the conduct of investigative actions is carried out by submitting to the investigator, prosecutor
the relevant motions, which are considered in the manner stipulated with Article 220 of the CPC
of Ukraine.

According to Article 220 of the CPC of Ukraine, the request of the defence party, the
victim and his representative or legal representative, the representative of the legal entity
undergoing proceedings, the investigator, the prosecutor shall be obliged to consider within a
maximum of three days from the moment of filing and to satisfy them, if there are appropriate
grounds.

The outcome of the request consideration shall be communicated to the person who
submitted the request. A full or partial rejection of the request shall be notified by a reasoned
decision, a copy of which shall be handed over to the person submitting the request, and if the
app request lication cannot be handed over for objective reasons, it shall be forwarded to the
 person submitting it.

My authority to represent V.M. Shokin under Article 50 of the CPC of Ukraine has
already been attached to his application on committing a criminal offence of 28.01.2020
(registration
#
 763VMI).
Taking the above into account, pursuant to Article 129-1 of the Constitution of Ukraine,
Articles 21, 38, 50, 93, 220, 369 of the CPC of Ukraine, -
I ASK:
1. To execute the decision of the investigating judge of the Pecherskyi District Court of
Kyiv I.V. Lytvynova in case
#
 757/4597/20-
$
 on 06.02.2020.
2. To submit to the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations information on the
application (registration
#
 763VMI of 28.01.2020) from
V.M. Shokin concerning the
commission of a criminal offence against him by Joseph Biden, a citizen of the United States of
America, in
Ukraine and abroad, interference in the activities of a law enforcement officer ,
when such actions prevented the detention of persons who committed crimes, the responsibility
for which is provided for in paragraph 2 Article 343 of the CPC of Ukraine (not later than 24
hours after receiving this request).
3. To submit an extract from the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations on the results
of entering the information stated in the V.M. Shokin application on committing a criminal
offence (registration
#
 763VMI of 28.01.2020).
4. To oblige investigators of the State Bureau of Investigation in the manufacture of
which the criminal proceedings will be conducted on the application of V.M. Shokin on a
criminal offence of 28.01.2020, to hand over to V.M. Shokin a note on the rights and obligations
of the victim and to interrogate him as a victim.
5. To inform of the request consideration in the order and terms determined by the
criminal procedural legislation.
LAW ASSOCIATION “LESHCHENKO, DOROSHEHKO AND PARTNERS”

Additions:
> a copy of the cover letter of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv from I.V. Lytvynova
of 07.02.2020, in case
#
 757/4597/20-
$
 on 1 sheet;
> a copy of the decision of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv from I.V. Lytvynova in
case
#
 757/4597/20-
$
 of 06.02.2020 on 1 sheet.
Representative of the victim V.M. Shokin,
attorney-at-law ____________________ O.I. Teleshetskiy
(signature)
*Stamp / State Bureau of Investigation / registration
#
 4244-20 / of 11.02.2020 / number of sheets – 2 / main document – 2 / additions – 2 *
LAW ASSOCIATION “LESHCHENKO, DOROSHEHKO AND PARTNERS”

Ukraine officials say the court-ordered investigation could include a review of non-public documents and possibly even interviews.

The court order revives allegations that were at the center of President Trump’s recent impeachment and acquittal, and which have dogged Joe Biden since he boasted in a 2018 video interview that he threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S.-backed loan guarantees if Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko did not fire Shokin as the country’s chief prosecutor.

Shokin alleges he was fired on March 29, 2016 specifically because his office refused to shut down a long-running corruption investigation into Burisma, one of Ukraine’s larger natural gas companies.  The firm hired Hunter Biden as a board member in spring 2014, shortly after Joe Biden was named by President Obama to oversee Ukraine-U.S. relations. Records gathered by the FBI show Hunter Biden’s American firm was paid more than $3 million between 2014 and 2016.

President Trump’s private lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, asked the State Department and Ukraine officials back in 2019 to investigate the Bidens, an act which gave rise to the impeachment proceedings,

During impeachment testimony, multiple State Department officials said they believed the Bidens’ arrangement created the appearance of a conflict of interest and that the department even blocked a business deal with Burisma at one point over concerns the company was corrupt.

Joe Biden and his defenders have denied any wrongdoing, saying the vice president sought Shokin’s firing because the prosecutor was ineffective in fighting corruption. His supporters have also claimed that the Burisma investigation was dormant at the time Shokin was fired and therefore not a high priority.

But evidence has emerged in recent weeks that the probe into Burisma, in fact, was heating up when Shokin was fired in spring 2016. The prosecutor’s office had secured a ruling re-seizing assets of Burisma’s owner in early February 2016, and the Latvian government acknowledges it sent a warning to Ukraine officials that same month flagging several Burisma transactions, including payments to Hunter Biden, as “suspicious.”

Documents recently released under the Freedom of Information Act also show Burisma’s lawyers were pressuring the State Department in February 2016 to end the corruption allegations against the firm, even invoking Hunter Biden’s name as the reason.

And Shokin himself says he was making plans to interview Hunter Biden, an act that likely would have garnered major attention in the United States as Democrats were trying to defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

Hunter Biden recently left Burisma’s board and said he believes in retrospect it was bad judgment to join the Ukraine company while his father oversaw U.S.-Ukraine relations. He also acknowledged he likely got the job because of his last name.

Whatever Ukraine’s State Bureau of Investigation does, the emergence of an investigation in Ukraine focusing attention on the Biden’s ethics comes at an unwelcome time for Joe Biden, whose presidential campaign lagged for months but got a jolt over the weekend when he won convincingly in South Carolina’s primary.

Biden’s momentum continued Monday on the eve of the critical Super Tuesday elections when rivals Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg dropped from the 2020 Democratic presidential race and announced plans to endorse the former vice president.

While the Ukraine probe just gets started, a separate investigation launched by Republicans in the U.S. Senate has been growing for weeks as investigators seek documents on Hunter Biden’s finances, his overseas travels with the vice president and possible interviews with Ukraine officials.

For a more complete timeline of key events in the Ukraine scandal, click here.
via zerohedge
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Return to Who shot JFK, and why?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests