TRICKS IN THIS STORY THAT EVEN DAVID COPPERFIELD IS NOT CAPABLE OF AND A NEW LIE OF LAW FIRM CANDEY

Dear Supporters

The topic of today’s update was suggested to me by the term “totally without merit” (TWOM) used in English law, and also by the fact that in April it will be 7 years since I became accused and arrested in absentia in the criminal case fabricated in Russia by PhosAgro (listed on the London Stoke Exchange) against me.

My former Russian lawyer Valery Stepanov, who was widely known in Russia, described this criminal case as follows:

“From my many years of experience I can declare that I have never met a stranger and more absurd criminal case and have never heard of anything like it. In terms of the number and quality of elementary violations, this criminal case has no analogues. I am convinced that this criminal case is completely fabricated and was initiated not with the aim of investigating something, but with the aim of being used as an instrument of the crime committed against Sychev, that is, to be an instrument of illegal pressure on Sychev in the conflict with PhosAgro.

Taking into account such a large-scale level of lawlessness and obvious absurdity that has developed in Russia in relation to Sychev in relation to his conflict with PhosAgro, he cannot count on even the most elementary legality and justice in Russia”.

This characterization was given by Mr Stepanov specifically for the English court in the written witness statement, which was before all the judges who, in one way or another, participated in the consideration of my lawsuit against PhosAgro. Surprisingly, not a single English judge, in their decisions, even mentioned this document, which contains a description of events shocking for absolutely any person.

I was accused of committing a crime that even the world-famous magician David Copperfield, who is able to walk through walls, could hardly have committed. According to the PhosAgro shareholder and the investigator, I managed twice secretly and without leaving a trace to overcome the multi-stage security system of the house, which became the only one in Russia, to the strict security system of which the press devoted an entire article, titled “The residential building of the strict regime” (that is, drawing an analogy with a maximum security prison). Thus, we can say that this house ranks first in Russia in terms of the level of security.

The accusation against me reads (quote from Valery Stepanov): “The order to recognize Sychev the accused indicated that the investigation did not establish nine circumstances related to the secret penetration of an unknown person into?the Antoshin's house, but nevertheless established that it?was?Sychev?who organized it.?There was no evidence of this. According to the Criminal Code such an accusation is?no more than a confirmation of innocence of Sychev in the form of at least unstated involvement.?But contrary to the law,?Sychev was recognized as accused”.

Thus, in this story, superpowers (which even David Copperfield is not capable of) were demonstrated not only by me, but also by the investigator, who managed to solve an equation with nine unknowns and only one known (that the secret events took place in that house of the strict regime). I would nominate such an extremely intelligent investigator for the Nobel Prize.

But this is far from all the supernatural in this story (I would even say that this is only a prelude). I think no one will ever guess why, according to the PhosAgro shareholder, as well as the investigator, I decided to go through the walls of a heavily guarded house. To secretly put in the mailbox of a PhosAgro shareholder a six-month-old letter, which was sent to PhosAgro by registered post and e-mail with three signatures (my signature, the notary's signature and the signature of the same Valery Stepanov) - my pre-trial letter. But my trick would not be so spectacular if I did not cut out all three signatures from this letter before secretly putting a long-sent letter in the mailbox of a heavily guarded house. Why did I commit such a strange act that was totally without merit (or rather, completely idiotic), the investigator did not investigate and does not want to investigate.

The next miracle that I have performed, which David Copperfield is absolutely incapable of and which deserves to be listed in the Guinness Book of Records, is described in the court decision for my arrest. According to the court (quote by Valery Stepanov), I “flew to the United States using a ticket on a long-defunct flight from the United States to Russia”.

What does the term from English law “totally without merit” have to do with this, the reader may ask. Because both the charge against me and the court decision on my arrest are absolutely delusional and it is this word (delusion) that comes to my mind as a synonym for the English term TWOM. Other synonyms (inadequacy, absurdity) are not suitable for describing exactly how I was being accused and arrested. The words "inadequate" and "absurd" are too often used in everyday life and are not suitable for describing the behavior of a person who, for example, in all seriousness claims that not squirrels, but crocodiles run through the trees in Hyde Park. For such a situation, the most appropriate word is delusion, and in a strictly medical sense - "a disorder of thinking with the emergence of painful ideas, reasoning, conclusions that do not correspond to reality and in which the patient is unshakably convinced". Or in other words - when a person has lost touch with reality and is not able to adequately perceive the surrounding reality, his or her words and actions.

The cases of such clinical delusion in Russian courts do not surprise anyone (especially now), when the customers of such decisions of judges (and investigators) are oligarchs close to Putin (shareholders of PhosAgro).

But the loss of touch with reality became contagious and spread to England. And I'll give you a specific example. In the Russian criminal case, PhosAgro stated in 2015: “The protection of the interests of the PhosAgro group in the Arbitration courts has never been and could not be included in the area of responsibility of Sychev”. In the UK trial, in 2021, PhosAgro, forgetting about its words of 2015, said exactly the opposite - that this has always been part of my responsibilities. Liars often get confused in their lies - this also does not surprise anyone. But what may be surprising is the words of PhosAgro's today English lawyer, Mr Riem of the respectable PCB Byrne, who, in all seriousness, told the English judges that there was not the slightest contradiction between PhosAgro's old and new positions. It's like saying that there is no difference between black and white and that they are the same color. And this is obvious to any person with a healthy mind (even elementary school students).

But, unfortunately, the English court (namely Mr Justice Foxton, who is now the Judge in Charge of the Commercial Court) came to the conclusion that it was not Mr Riem's words about the absence of contradictions were TWOM and a lie (which is obvious to anyone), but such (TWOM) are precisely my words (that Mr Riem's words about the absence of contradictions are lies and TWOM).

I will repeat that if this were happening in Russian courts it would not surprise me at all, but this is happening in the UK, where I hoped Russian oligarchs close to Putin cannot exert such a magical influence on judges as in Russia, forcing them to conclude that I flew from Russia to the US using a ticket for a non-existent flight from the US to Russia.

In 2021, the representative of PhosAgro, who, under the threat of my murder, demanded that I assign the claim against PhosAgro to him, uttered one very correct phrase in his monologue as follows:

“Look, Igor, I have such a question. Imagine that I am you. I am Igor Sychev, and you are the judge. And here sits our defendant [who is pictured next to Putin]. Please tell me, now you are a judge and you are a bribed judge. This is not possible in the English court, but we will imagine for a moment that you are the bribed judge. What would you cling to to make a decision not in my favor? Here you are the judge, you are the bribed judge, you need to cling to something. A judge is guided, except for his wig, by his conscience, he is not guided by anything else, this is in any legislation of the world. Now, what would you say? What would a bribed judge cling to?”

The phrase I mean is - “A judge is guided, except for his wig, by his conscience, he is not guided by anything else, this is in any legislation of the world”. It is impossible not to agree with the representative of PhosAgro that judges, when assessing the facts, are guided by conscience (and I will add from myself - logic and common sense). And, unfortunately, I am very much surprised that in this case, conscience, logic and common sense led the English judge to the conclusion he made. And this conclusion is that TWOM is not the words of the English lawyer about the absence of a difference between black and white, but the words of the opponent of this lawyer (me) that the difference is fundamental and obvious to any person.

CANDEY

Also today I cannot ignore the story connected with bribery by Russian oligarchs from PhosAgro of my last lawyers (CANDEY). As the flow of outrageous and easily verifiable lies from CANDEY continues unabated, today I had to file yet another additional complaint with the Solicitor Regulation Authority demanding the immediate closure of CANDEY.

The last case of lies is so blatantly primitive that I was reminded of my letter to PhosAgro dated 2 February, in which I wrote the following about the CANDEY story:

“PhosAgro's problem has always been that its illegal or at least unfair actions have always reached a grotesque level.?I know this from 18 years of close cooperation and have repeatedly told about it.?If, for example, to fight with competitors for prices, then also to the maximum, reaching in actions to complete shame, which is described, for example, in a truthful article?about how the director of PhosAgro hid from the bailiffs in the toilet, and the lawyers of PhosAgro behaved in such a way that they became a laughing stock for all readers.

Let me demonstrate your grotesqueness with the example of the bribing of Candey. Why could not the situation have been more elegant and plausible??For example, do not demand (very aggressively) that my answer should be only 3-5 pages long and contain only hints (without answering my questions about the reasons for such a strange approach to?litigation, especially knowing that I myself have been practising litigation very successfully for at least 18 years), and instead of this absurdity to create a 30-page document yourself, in which you can gracefully circumvent the most acute problems for you (the bribe-givers)??It would not be so obvious and grotesque.?But PhosAgro, as usual, wanted to make the most of the situation, bringing the situation to complete absurdity - 3-5 pages, otherwise the contract is terminated.?It is like the story of the PhosAgro director's hide-and-seek in the toilet”.

As I did not understand before, I still do not understand now - why can't one lie so that it is not so obvious and easily verifiable? This (new) lie was eventually thought through in the minds of many of the lawyers involved in the bribery of CANDEY (perhaps, the above-mentioned Mr Riem). Why, with such a large team consisting of lawyers from several firms, it is impossible to come up with a more convincing lie? I will probably never know the answer to this question.

?

?

Many thanks,

Igor Sychev