In the North Kazakhstan region, a verdict has been delivered in a case of police corruption. The Petropavlovsk city court found former major Yerbolat Kaptayev guilty of repeatedly accepting bribes.
According to Ratel.kz, the court established that Kaptayev maintained contacts with repeat offender Ruslan Nagumanov, accepting gifts and services from him — a phone, car rental, and bill payments. The defendant himself claimed that the communication was purely operational in nature.
For her part, the judge noted the inconsistency of the defence's version.
"Nagumanov bought the phone at 14:00, and by 14:27 had handed it to Kaptayev. This was not part of operational activity," stated the verdict.
As evidence, the prosecution used witness testimony, transcripts of phone calls, correspondence, and materials from covert investigative actions. The prosecutor requested 9 years' imprisonment for the former police officer.
The defence argued that the evidence should be assessed in light of the specifics of operational work and requested closed hearings, but the motion was denied.
Some of Nagumanov's testimony was disputed. He claimed he gave it under duress and in exchange for promises of a lighter sentence. However, the court deemed the totality of the evidence sufficient.
In the end, former police officer Yerbolat Kaptayev was sentenced to 8 years' imprisonment to be served in a medium-security facility. The court also stripped him of the rank of police major, ordered confiscation of property, and imposed a lifelong ban on holding positions in the civil service.
The verdict has not yet entered into force. The defence has stated its intention to appeal.
Alongside Kaptayev's case, the court also considered a case against Nagumanov regarding charges of fraud and hooliganism. The judicial panel upheld Nagumanov's sentence unchanged. He will spend the next 7 years in a maximum-security colony, which, according to some observers, makes his testimony contentious.
Kaptayev's defence pointed out that Nagumanov's testimony contradicted a number of facts and was given under duress or in exchange for promised mitigation of his preventive measure. According to the lawyers, this may have influenced the content of the indictment.