Witness acquitted — but the case he was tried for continues

Yusuf Mameshev was persecuted for testimony that undermined the SBU's version against a NABU detective. The court found no crime — and this raises an uncomfortable question about the investigation itself.

107
Share:
Юсуф Мамешев (Фото: Ганна Чехович / ZMINA)

On May 20, the Shevchenko District Court of Kyiv found Yusuf Mameshev not guilty — an entrepreneur with Uzbek business roots who was accused of giving false testimony. The ZMINA organization reported this from the courtroom.

Mameshev is not a random figure. He is a central witness in the case of NABU detective Ruslan Magamedrasoulov, head of the inter-regional detective management unit, who was detained by the SBU on July 21, 2024, and suspected of aiding the aggressor state.

What is at the heart of the conflict

The entire version of the prosecution rested on audio recordings of an intercepted conversation: allegedly Magamedrasoulov discussed the sale of technical hemp to Dagestan — which led the SBU to qualify this as a connection to the Russian Federation. Mameshev was the person who participated in that conversation.

"The witness came and testified under oath: I spoke with Magamedrasoulov about hemp, but it was about selling to Uzbekistan, not Dagestan. And immediately after that, he was notified of suspicion."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, interpretation of the defense position

According to Mameshev, he has been conducting business in Uzbekistan for many years, which explains the context of the conversation. A case against him was registered on October 16, 2025 — the day after his testimony in court under oath. The Kravchenko group prosecutor's office demanded two years of restricted liberty, corrective labor, and probation supervision.

The pressure scheme — as the defense sees it

  • Mameshev gave testimony that contradicted the SBU's version.
  • The next day, criminal proceedings were opened against him.
  • He was subjected to a preventive measure: an electronic ankle bracelet, travel ban, and passport confiscation.
  • On May 20, the court found no elements of a crime and acquitted him completely.

The Anti-Corruption Center (APC) noted that Mameshev's testimony is confirmed not only by his words in court but also by correspondence with Magamedrasoulov and other materials from the case file. According to the APC's assessment, the SBU investigator could not even name the exact number of case volumes when disclosing materials to the defense.

Broader context: Is NABU under pressure or is the detective under suspicion?

Magamedrasoulov participated in Operation Midas — an investigation into a corruption scheme at Energoatom involving businessman Timur Mindich (call sign "Carlson"). According to the detective himself, his task was to document Mindich and the associated Oleksandr Tsukerman ("Shugerman"). Magamedrasoulov cites this activity as the reason for his detention.

The SBU, in turn, alleged that the detective had contacts with Fedor Khrystenko — a former OPZZ deputy, believed to be an FSB agent. Magamedrasoulov spent more than four months in custody before the preventive measure was relaxed.

The acquittal of Mameshev does not close Magamedrasoulov's case and does not confirm his innocence. However, it removes the only witness whom the prosecution was trying to transform into proof of the falsity of an alternative version of events.

If the prosecutor's appeal against the acquittal fails — and the recording of the conversation remains without the "correct" interpretation from the prosecution — will the main case against Magamedrasoulov withstand the next court hearing?

World News

Politics

# On Poltava Region, TCK Alert Groups Will Be Formed Exclusively from Veterans with Combat Experience. What Changes in Practice — and Whether There Are Enough Such People. The Territorial Defense Centers (TCC) in Poltava region will recruit members of alert groups only from veterans who have combat experience. This decision aims to improve the efficiency and professionalism of notification units responsible for mobilizing citizens for military service. The change is intended to address previous issues where alert groups lacked proper training and understanding of military protocols. Veterans with actual combat experience are expected to bring practical knowledge and credibility to these operations. However, questions remain about the feasibility of this approach. The availability of combat-experienced veterans willing and able to work in alert groups may be limited, potentially creating staffing challenges. Local authorities will need to assess whether the pool of suitable candidates is sufficient to fully implement this policy across the region without disrupting the mobilization process.

4 hours ago