To General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation

Mr. Chaika, Yuriy Yakovlevich

125993 GSP-3 Russia, Moscow, ul. B.Dmitrovka, 15a

From the citizen of the USA – Mr. Jamison Reed Firestone

having registration at XXXXXX Moscow,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Copy to: Chairman of the Council under Russian

Federation President’s aegis for Encouraging the
Development of the Civil Society Institutions and the
Human Rights Ms. Pamfilova E.A.
103132, Moscow, Staraya pl., 4.

December 14th, 2009

Application

I, Jamison Reed Firestone, a US citizen, am applying to you concerning the

investigation being conducted by the General Prosecutor’s Office as per the order of the RF
President for the circumstances of death of RF citizen Magnitskey, Sergei Leonidovich in the
Pre-Trial Detention Prison “Matrosskaya Tishina” (FBU IZ-77/1) on November 16th, 2009.
Magnitskey S.L. had been kept in pre-trial detention under the petition of an investigator of
the Investigating Committee (SK) of Internal Ministry Affairs (MVD) Mr. Silchenko O.F.
who had been investigating criminal case No.153123.
The circumstances of S.L. Magnitskey’s death cause well-grounded concern.
S.L. Magnitskey was deprived in prison of necessary medical care. The conditions of his
detention in prison had been consistently worsened after he refused to make false statements
against himself and other persons, despite the pressure from the side of investigation
authority. His death occured under unrevealed and suspicious circumstances. Traces of
violence were found on his body during the funeral service.
In this connection I ask you to pay attention to the following circumstances while
conducting the investigation of S.L. Magnitskey’s death.
1. In his testimony of June 5th, 2008 and on October 7th, 2008 under criminal case No.
374015 and on October 13th, 2009 under criminal case No.153123 S.L. Magnitskey testified
regarding the circumstances of the theft of companies which used to be owned by Hermitage
Fund (specifically: “Mahaon”, “Parthenion”, “Rilend”) and that these companies were
subsequently used to steal 5,4 billion rubles from the Russian Federation budget by means of
organizing an unlawful tax refund. In this testimony he pointed to the (in his opinion)
involvement in these crimes of a number of officers of the Principal Department of Internal
Affairs of Moscow (GUVD of Moscow) including: operative officer Mr. Kuznetsov A.K. and
investigator-officer Mr. Karpov P.A., as well the other persons, specifically: advocates Mr.
Pavlov A.A., Ms. Mayorova Y.M., Ms. Maltseva E.K., citizens Mr. Markelov V.A.,
Mr. Kurochkin V.N., Mr. Khlebnikov V.G.
2. On November 24th, 2008, - i.e. right after having made testimony against Mr.
Kuznetsov A.K. and Mr. Karpov P.A., - S.L. Magnitskey was arrested under criminal case
No.153123 by officers subordinate to Mr. Kuznetsov A.K. who

1
 had been permanently included into the membership of the investigation group during the
entire time of this criminal case investigation.
3. The investigation group under the guidance of investigator-officer Mr.
Silchenko O.F., including Mr. Kuznetsov A.K., had been simultaneously investigating two
criminal cases, specifically: No.152979 regarding the theft of 5,4 billion rubles from the
budget and No.153123 on tax-evasion – it was under this criminal case that S.L. Magnitskey
was arrested by the officers of Mr. Kuznetsov A.K.
4. Factually, S.L. Magnitskey was actually kept for 11 months in prison as a hostage of
Kuznetsov A.K., against whom he [S.L. Magnitskey] had testified, - [S.L. Magnitskey] had
repeatedly stated this in his complaints and in his oral arguments in court. While keeping
S.L. Magnitskey in detention the members of the investigation group applied pressure to him
[S.L. Magnitskey] the pressure was psychological and physical with the aim of coercing from
him false testimony desired by the investigators.
5. The charges brought by investigation against S.L. Magnitskey were unlawful and
groundless, and as well his detention [in the detention prison] was also unlawful and
groundless. S.L. Magnitskey could not have been the perpetrator of the crime he was charged
with because of the following reasons:
a) S.L. Magnitskey was neither an owner, nor an executive officer, nor the accountant
of OOO “Saturn Investments” and OOO “Dal’nyaya Step’ ” in the year 2001 and did not sign
the profits tax declaration for the year 2001, which contained, in the investigation’s opinion,
the incorrect data.
b) S.L. Magnitskey could not had hired disabled persons on behalf of OOO “Saturn
Investments” and OOO “Dal’nyaya Step’ ” in the years 1999-2001, because had never visited
Kalmykiya before the year 2002, when he participated in [arbitration] court case in the city of
Elista as the legal representative of the same companies.
c) S.L. Magnitskey could not had been paying compensation in the office of the
company “Firestone Duncan” by cash, because the disabled persons had been receiving their
official salaries via bank wire transfers to their bank accounts, - this is confirmed by the
surviving payment orders.
d) OOO “Dal’nyaya Step’ ” and OOO “Saturn Investments” had not committed tax
law violations. These companies had been repeatedly inspected by the tax authorities, the
criminal case which contained the allegations was canceled in the year 2005 by investigative-
officer Mr. Nuskhinov because of the lack of the elements of a crime (corpus delicti), but the
criminal case was resumed on February 27th, 2008 after investigator-officer Mr. Karpov P.A.
and officers subordinat to Mr. Kuznetsov A.K. visited the city of Elista in a response to the
complaint made by Hermitage Fund regarding the theft of its companies.
1. S.L. Magnitskey was arrested based on documents falsified by law enforcements’
officers. The facts of this documents falsification are obvious and do not leave any
doubts:
- he [S.L. Magnitskey] had not applied for a visa to the United Kingdom, this is
confirmed by an official reply from the Embassy of this country;
- he [S.L. Magnitskey] had not reserved a ticket to Kiev, the ticket reservation
was falsified, the ticket presented by the investigation should have been paid
for before November 22nd, 2008, while he [S.L. Magnitskey] did not buy the
ticket and continued to stay at home on November 24th, 2008.
- he [S.L. Magnitskey] could not, from Moscow, intimidate witnesses who lived
in the city of Elista, because he [S.L. Magnitskey], according to the documents
presented by the investigation, visited Elista only once in the year 2002, six
years before the arrest.
- his [S.L. Magnitskey’s] foreign travel passport was confiscated during the
investigation’s search of house, - because of this any arguments that he
[S.L. Magnitskey] could leave Russia do not have any grounds.
7. Within framework of criminal case No.153123 investigator-officer Mr. Silchenko
has falsified evidence. With the purpose to conceal the evidence of falsification he
[investigator-officer Mr. Silchenko] has twice in breach of law separated the criminal case
2
against S.L. Magnitskey into the separate proceedings. While doing this, investigator-officer
Mr. Silchenko has been making for the “separated case” against S.L. Magnitskey so called
“attested copies” of the documents (criminal case evidence), but the original copies from
which the attested copies were made did not exist in the criminal case No.153123 and the
authenticity of the “attested copies” therefore raises obvious doubts. Moreover, the separating
of the criminal case against S.L. Magnitskey and the sending this case to the court with only
copies of only a tiny part of the evidence collected under the case was the flagrant violation
of Criminal-Procedural legislation.
8. The procedural violations made by the investigation did not allow the further
keeping of S.L. Magnitskey under detention. Investigator-officer Mr. Silchenko O.F. having
separated the criminal case against S.L. Magnitskey into the separate proceedings by his
resolution of October 16th, 2009 did not appoint the investigation group for investigating this
case and stated to the advocates of S.L. Magnitskey that there was no need to do so. After the
advocates of S.L. Magnitskey filed a complaint against these actions of the investigator-
officer, he (the investigator-officer) manufactured a backdated and forged resolution for
appointment of the investigating group and as well documents to show that this resolution
had been announced to S.L. Magnitskey on October 16th, 2009. In reality on October 16th,
2009 the investigating proceedings against S.L. Magnitskey had been carried out by the
investigator-officer Gritsay who only announced to him (to S.L. Magnitskey) the resolution
about separation of the criminal case against him (S.L. Magnitskey) into the separate
proceedings. In that resolution no words were said that the investigating group had been
appointed to investigate the case against S.L. Magnitskey.
Taking into consideration the above mentioned circumstances, I ask you to do the
following in the framework of the investigation being conducted under the order of President
of the Russian Federation regarding the circumstances of S.L. Magnitskey death:
1. to withdraw criminal cases No.153123, 311578 and No.152979 from the
Investigation Committee under the MVD RF (Ministry of Internal Affairs
of the Russian Federation);
2. to withdraw criminal case No. 374015 from the Investigation Committee
of the SZAO (North-West Administrative District of Moscow) of the
Investigation Department of Moscow of Investigation Committee under
the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation;
3. to examine the justness of the accusation brought against S.L. Magnitskey
taking into consideration the facts stated in his testimony of June 5th, 2008
and October 7th, 2008 and October 13th, 2009;
4. to investigate the falsifications made by investigator-officer Mr.
Silchenko O.F. of the evidence under the criminal cases No.153123 and
311578;
5. to investigate the justness of separating the criminal case No. 311578
against S.L. Magnitskey into separate proceedings;
6. to investigate the facts of falsifications made by officers of MVD RF
(Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation) of documents that
were submittted as the grounds to arrest S.L. Magnitskey;
7. to investigate the facts of falsifications made by investigator-officer Mr.
Silchenko O.F. of the resolution to appoint the investigating group for
investigation the separated criminal case against S.L. Magnitskey;
8. to investigate the justness and lawfulness of the numerous transfers of
S.L. Magnitskey from one detention prison to the other and from one
prison cell to the other, and as well the organization for him (for
S.L. Magnitskey) of inhuman conditions, flagrant violation of his
(S.L. Magnitskey’s) rights and to ascertain who, namely, had been issuing
the relevant instructions to the officers of the FSIN (Federal Service for
Execution of Criminal Penalties);
9. to start a criminal case on the facts of falsifications made by officers of the
MVD RF (Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation) of the
3
 evidence for the criminal case and of the documents that were submitted as
the ground to rule against S.L. Magnitskey’s motion of pre-trial injunction
to the form of arrest in detention prison;

…………………………………..
Jamison Reed Firestone

Attachments:
1. The text of testimony by S.L. Magnitskey as of October 13th, 2009 on 10 pages;
2. the protocol of interrogation of the accused person - S.L. Magnitskey as of June
5th, 2008 on 10 pages;
3. the testimony of S.L. Magnitskey as of Ocotber 7th, 2008 on 7 pages;
4. the complaint by Mr. Kharitonov D.V. – the advocate for S.L. Magnitskey as of
September 11th, 2009 on 7 pages.