According to the criminal law, liability for sexual intercourse or other sexual acts with a person under the age of sixteen occurs only if the person was knowingly aware of  

By the verdict of the Military Court of the Almaty garrison dated December 27, 2012: S.- sentenced under part 3 of Article 122 of the Criminal Code to 7 years in prison, under part 1 of Article 325 of the Criminal Code to 1 year in prison, under part 3 of Article 325 of the Criminal Code to 1 year of restriction of freedom, on the basis of parts 1 and 3 of Article 58 of the Criminal Code 7 years of imprisonment in a general regime penal colony. The sentence was calculated from May 26, 2012. By the decision of the appellate instance of the Military Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 12, 2013, the sentence was changed, according to part 3 of Article 122 of the Criminal Code, 3 years and 5 months of imprisonment were imposed using Article 55 of the Criminal Code, 3 years and 5 months of imprisonment were finally imposed on the basis of part 3 of Article 58 of the Criminal Code, and the rest of the sentence was upheld changes. By the decision of the Cassation Board of the Military Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 07, 2013, the decision of the appellate instance dated March 12, 2013 was left unchanged. By the verdict of the Court of S. He was found guilty of sexual intercourse and other sexual acts with the victim G., who was obviously under the age of sixteen, committed repeatedly, as well as of making and using an official identification card in his name with the rank of "major" and the position of head of the department of the National Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Having studied the case file at the request of the defense, the supervisory judicial board of the Supreme Court considered that the court's verdict against S. should be changed on the following grounds. The court's conclusions on the guilt of the convicted S. in the manufacture and use of an official identification card in his name with the rank of "major" and the position of head of the Department of the National Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan have been proved by the case materials. At the same time, the court's decision to find S. guilty of sexual intercourse and other sexual acts with a victim who was obviously under the age of sixteen is not based on the law and the materials of the criminal case. The lower court, in violation of the requirements of article 77 of the Constitution and article 19 of the CPC on the presumption of innocence, did not eliminate the doubts about S.'s guilt in the case and did not interpret them in favor of the accused. From the consistent testimony of the convicted S., it follows that in August 2010, via the Internet, he registered on one of the dating sites, where he met and received an offer of friendship from G., registered under the username "Anyuta, 18". In the process of communicating on the Internet, they learned about each other. They met for the first time on August 28, 2010, at that moment he became aware that she was 16 years old. I didn't know that she was 14 years old at the time of their acquaintance, because they register on the website where they met strictly from the age of 18. The testimony of the convicted S. that he was not aware of G.'s non-achievement at the time of their acquaintance for 16 years is not refuted by the case materials, but on the contrary, they find some confirmation in them.

According to the criminal law, liability for sexual intercourse or other sexual acts with a person under the age of sixteen occurs only if the person was knowingly aware of  

During the investigation of S.'s possible illegal activities, the criminal prosecution authorities recorded telephone conversations between S. and G. Based on their results and revealed the facts of sexual intercourse between S. and G. It follows from the testimony of the victim G. that she did not report S.'s sexual intercourse with her to law enforcement agencies. The law enforcement officers found out about these facts promptly, after which they contacted G. and her father so that they would write a statement on bringing S. to criminal responsibility. They agreed and wrote such a statement. It can also be seen from G.'s testimony that she indicated her age in the questionnaire on the Internet dating site. From the transcript of telephone conversations between S. and G., which were secretly recorded as part of an operational search operation, it is clearly seen that S. was extremely surprised to learn that G. had reached the age of 16 only at the time of this telephone conversation and had not reached that age at the time of sexual intercourse with him. In such circumstances, in accordance with the principle of the presumption of innocence, interpreting the existing irremediable doubts in favor of the convicted person, it should be recognized that S., when committing sexual intercourse and other sexual acts with G., did not knowingly, that is, in advance and reliably, that the victim had not reached the age of sixteen. According to the criminal law, liability under Article 122 of the Criminal Code occurs only if the person is aware that the victim at the time of sexual intercourse with her has not reached the age of 16. In this regard, the court's verdict against S. under Article 122 of the Criminal Code is subject to cancellation with the termination of the case in this part of the proceedings due to the absence of corpus delicti in his actions.  In accordance with the requirements of part 5 of Article 176 of the CPC, the court's decision to recover from convicted S. to the state's income the procedural costs spent on the production of forensic phonographic examination, forensic psychological and philological examination and forensic psychological and criminalistic examination is also subject to cancellation. The Supervisory Judicial Board of the Supreme Court changed the verdict of the Military Court of the Almaty garrison, the decisions of the appellate and cassation judicial boards of the Military Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan in relation to S.. The court's verdict regarding the conviction of S. under part 3 of Article 122 of the Criminal Code was overturned, the case in this part was discontinued due to the lack of corpus delicti in his actions.

She also overturned the court's decision to recover the procedural costs spent on the production of forensic videographic expertise, forensic psychological and philological expertise and forensic psychological and criminalistic expertise from convicted S. to the state's income. The court's verdict against S. under part 1 of Article 325 of the Criminal Code and part 3 of Article 325 of the Criminal Code remained unchanged. On the basis of part 2 of Article 58 of the Criminal Code, she determined S. 1 (one) for the totality of crimes one year of imprisonment. In connection with serving the sentence imposed by the court, S. was immediately released from custody. The rest of the court's verdict against S. remained unchanged. 

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases