Trial of lawyer Vadim Vidyakin for video recording in a public place, part 1
The trial of lawyer Vadim Vidyakin for video recording in a public place, part 1 Leninsky District Court of the city of Kirov, Federal Judge Elena Vladimirovna Vostrikova opened the court hearing on the case normally, after listening to the arguments about the video recording, she did not prohibit it, understanding that my actions were legal
She also listened attentively to the arguments of the lawyer Vadim Vidyakin's response to the claim of Alla Vitalievna Novoselova, did not interrupt, behaved politely and kindly, while the plaintiff Alla Vitalievna Novoselova did not appear at the trial at all, having sent a motion to consider the case in her absence
And everything would seem to be fine, but the decision of the Federal Judge of the Leninsky District Court of the city of Kirov Elena Vladimirovna Vostrikova, which was made simply out of the ordinary, I assume, but I cannot reliably assert that Judge Elena Vladimirovna Vostrikova either entered in a criminal conspiracy with Novosyolova Alla Vitalyevna, or simply did not understand the issue of video filming in a public place
There are no legal grounds for satisfying the claim of Novosyolova Alla Vitalyevna, but despite this, the claim was satisfied, we are waiting for what the Federal Judge of the Leninsky District Court of the city of Kirov, Vostrikova Elena Vladimirovna, will write in the reasoning decision, what will justify such a decision
Of course, comrades, I fundamentally disagree with this decision and will appeal it to a higher court, but it turns out that it is interesting that a judge can be filmed on video during the trial, police officers can be filmed on video, bailiffs can be filmed on video, but a lawyer cannot be filmed on video in an office, which is a public place? What kind of nonsense is this? Do we have lawyers with a higher status than judges, police and bailiffs?)
I don't have answers to this and many other questions yet, the claim is not justified, moral damage has not been proven by the plaintiff, what, in the plaintiff's opinion, was the moral damage and what moral or ethical suffering was suffered by the plaintiff Novoselova Alla Vitalievna, but despite this, the claim was satisfied by the court
To be continued... SHARE this video with all your friends in all social networks!!! SUBSCRIBE to the Channel Vadim Vidyakin Kirov in Law in Yandex Zen and YouTube, put likes, write comments!!!
#courtonlawyervadimvidyakin, #courtvideo, #lawyervadimvidyakin, #kirovinlaw, #judgevostrikovaelenavladimirovna, #leninskydistrictcourtkirov,