The three suspects Viktor Sayenko (Ukrainian: Віктор Саєнко, Russian: Виктор Саенко), Igor Suprunyuck (Ukrainian: Ігор Супрунюк, Russian: Игорь Супрунюк) and Alexander Hanzha (Ukrainian: Олександр Ганжа, Russian: Александр Ганжа) were arrested on July 23, 2007. Suprunyuck attempted to sell a mobile phone stolen from a victim in a local pawn shop, asking for 150 hryvnia (about US $20). Law enforcement agents tracked the phone's location. Suprunyuck and Sayenko were arrested near the cash register of the shop.[10][14][19] Hanzha was arrested at home, reportedly managing to flush other stolen mobile phones down the toilet. The phones were recovered, but all information on them was lost.
The three men were charged with involvement in 29 separate incidents, including 21 murders and eight more attacks where victims survived. Suprunyuck was charged with 27 of the cases, including 21 counts of capital murder, 8 armed robberies, and 1 count of animal cruelty. Sayenko was charged with 25 instances, including 18 murders, 5 robberies and 1 count of animal cruelty. Hanzha was charged with two counts of armed robbery stemming from a March 1, 2007 incident in Dniprodzerzhynsk.
All three confessed quickly, although Suprunyuck later withdrew his confession. Their trial began in June 2008. Suprunyuck pleaded not guilty, while the other two suspects pleaded guilty to all charges. Viktor Chevguz, Suprunyuck's original defense lawyer, left the case after reportedly being disappointed that his client's plea of insanity was not accepted. Lawyers for the victims' families argued that the level of care taken by the killers during their crime spree meant that they were fully aware of their actions.
Prosecution evidence included bloodstains on the suspects' clothing and video recordings of the murders. The defense denied that the people in the videos were the suspects, claiming serious problems with the investigation, including at least 10 more murders covered up by the prosecution, supposed cover-ups of additional arrests of people with powerful connections who were released without being charged, even naming some of the additional people supposedly involved with the murders. The case was heard by a panel of judges chaired by judge Ivan Senchenko. The prosecution asked for life imprisonment for Sayenko and Suprunyuck, and 15 years of hard labor for Hanzha. Ukraine has no capital punishment since February 2000 after the Constitutional Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in December 1999.
The three men were charged with involvement in 29 separate incidents, including 21 murders and eight more attacks where victims survived. Suprunyuck was charged with 27 of the cases, including 21 counts of capital murder, 8 armed robberies, and 1 count of animal cruelty. Sayenko was charged with 25 instances, including 18 murders, 5 robberies and 1 count of animal cruelty. Hanzha was charged with two counts of armed robbery stemming from a March 1, 2007 incident in Dniprodzerzhynsk.
All three confessed quickly, although Suprunyuck later withdrew his confession. Their trial began in June 2008. Suprunyuck pleaded not guilty, while the other two suspects pleaded guilty to all charges. Viktor Chevguz, Suprunyuck's original defense lawyer, left the case after reportedly being disappointed that his client's plea of insanity was not accepted. Lawyers for the victims' families argued that the level of care taken by the killers during their crime spree meant that they were fully aware of their actions.
Prosecution evidence included bloodstains on the suspects' clothing and video recordings of the murders. The defense denied that the people in the videos were the suspects, claiming serious problems with the investigation, including at least 10 more murders covered up by the prosecution, supposed cover-ups of additional arrests of people with powerful connections who were released without being charged, even naming some of the additional people supposedly involved with the murders. The case was heard by a panel of judges chaired by judge Ivan Senchenko. The prosecution asked for life imprisonment for Sayenko and Suprunyuck, and 15 years of hard labor for Hanzha. Ukraine has no capital punishment since February 2000 after the Constitutional Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in December 1999.
Appeal
On August 18, 2009, the Supreme Court of Ukraine referred the case back to the Dnipropetrovsk regional court of appeal. The move was welcomed by Igor Sayenko, who stated that it was a step towards clearing his son's name. Speaking at a press conference, Igor Sayenko and Vladimir Suprunyuck repeated their belief that the case was based on fabricated evidence. A spokesperson for the prosecutor's office said that the decision to refer the case back to the appeal court was procedural, and that they were confident that the verdict would be upheld. The appeal was scheduled for October 5, 2009. In an interview with the newspaper Novi Most, the mothers of Suprunyuck and Sayenko said that their children were being treated well in prison. It was also reported that Igor Sayenko was considering setting up a website about the case.
On November 24, 2009, the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld the life sentences passed on Igor Suprunyuck and Viktor Sayenko in February 2009. Alexander Hanzha did not appeal against his nine-year sentence.
On November 24, 2009, the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld the life sentences passed on Igor Suprunyuck and Viktor Sayenko in February 2009. Alexander Hanzha did not appeal against his nine-year sentence.
Defense Claims
The legal team defending the suspects consisted of three lawyers, one for each suspect. All three lawyers were originally court-appointed, but after the initial hearings Viktor Sayenko requested to be represented by his father because his appointed lawyer apparently graduated from law school only two months earlier. The request was granted, which significantly delayed the proceedings as Sayenko's father familiarized himself with the evidence. Igor Sayenko became the most prominent figure on the defense, giving numerous interviews and taking a lead role in court proceedings.
Hanzha's attorneys based their defense on the fact that he never participated in the murder spree, and was involved only with a single incident four months before it began, in which two men were robbed in the nearby town of Dniprodzerzhynsk. Hanzha admitted his guilt, hoping for leniency in sentencing.
The defense strategy for the other two suspects was to attack the prosecution on a wide front. Multiple investigators were called to the stand, including the leader of the arrest team and the lead investigator in the case. The defense claimed illegal searches, improperly kept records, and problems during questioning. Igor Sayenko raised questions about the videotape of the searches conducted in the suspects' apartments. According to Sayenko, the tape constantly stops and restarts, showing the evidence obtained only after being picked up by investigators, but never the actual moment of discovery. The legal team also denied that the people in the murder videos were the suspects.
In an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda, Igor Sayenko claimed that a fourth suspect named Danila Kozlov was initially charged with the murders. Tatiana Shram, a sister of victim Elena Shram, also stated in an interview that she saw Kozlov's name mentioned in court documents, and that Kozlov was reportedly aware of the murders, and was with the suspects just before her sister was murdered. Shram further stated that the investigators told her that Kozlov remains free because he "did not murder anyone," and that when her attorney attempted to bring up the matter in court, the judge "asked him to sit down."
Igor Sayenko continued to speculate on the influence of the families of the "real killers", claiming that he conducted an interview with an escaped victim who wanted his identity kept secret for fear for his life. This unnamed victim claimed that he identified the suspects in his attack, and that two other men were identified and arrested. The suspects were supposedly released an hour later due to pressure from their families, and two of the investigators were fired. Sayenko stated in court that four days before the three suspects were arrested, police caught two men and a woman committing one of the murders. The suspects attacked the police officers but were arrested and were booked under the names of Sayenko and Suprunyuck, but they were not the men currently on trial. "But now these details are being covered up", Sayenko said in court. "The investigators claim that this did not happen. But there are people, officers in the Militsiya, who on July 19, 2007 received reports that those three were arrested. […] But, alas, it turned out that the persons arrested had powerful parents. So the information was quickly suppressed, and instead my son and two of his friends were railroaded. I also believe that the girl arrested on that day has since left the country and is now in Germany."
The defense team also claimed the prosecution withheld from the court information that exonerated their clients. Igor Sayenko claimed the police interviewed witnesses and recovered evidence from two additional murders. The suspects had a strong alibi for the time of these murders, and so all information on these crimes was removed from the case.
Viktor Sayenko's defense claimed that he had a "psychological dependence" on Igor Suprunyuck, whom they called the ringleader. They claimed that Suprunyuck repeatedly threatened Sayenko, and that Sayenko feared for his life. Sayenko testified in court that he was in constant fear of Suprunyuck since 7th grade.
The strategy of the defense team received some support from the victims' families, who were reportedly dissatisfied with the slow-moving legal process and an alleged cover-up by the investigators. Some victims' relatives told the media they planned to begin an independent organization to monitor the court proceedings. The authorities in Ukraine strongly denied that a fourth person was involved in the killings who could still be at large, and said that rumors of similar crimes taking place since the arrest of the three suspects are unfounded.
Hanzha's attorneys based their defense on the fact that he never participated in the murder spree, and was involved only with a single incident four months before it began, in which two men were robbed in the nearby town of Dniprodzerzhynsk. Hanzha admitted his guilt, hoping for leniency in sentencing.
The defense strategy for the other two suspects was to attack the prosecution on a wide front. Multiple investigators were called to the stand, including the leader of the arrest team and the lead investigator in the case. The defense claimed illegal searches, improperly kept records, and problems during questioning. Igor Sayenko raised questions about the videotape of the searches conducted in the suspects' apartments. According to Sayenko, the tape constantly stops and restarts, showing the evidence obtained only after being picked up by investigators, but never the actual moment of discovery. The legal team also denied that the people in the murder videos were the suspects.
In an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda, Igor Sayenko claimed that a fourth suspect named Danila Kozlov was initially charged with the murders. Tatiana Shram, a sister of victim Elena Shram, also stated in an interview that she saw Kozlov's name mentioned in court documents, and that Kozlov was reportedly aware of the murders, and was with the suspects just before her sister was murdered. Shram further stated that the investigators told her that Kozlov remains free because he "did not murder anyone," and that when her attorney attempted to bring up the matter in court, the judge "asked him to sit down."
Igor Sayenko continued to speculate on the influence of the families of the "real killers", claiming that he conducted an interview with an escaped victim who wanted his identity kept secret for fear for his life. This unnamed victim claimed that he identified the suspects in his attack, and that two other men were identified and arrested. The suspects were supposedly released an hour later due to pressure from their families, and two of the investigators were fired. Sayenko stated in court that four days before the three suspects were arrested, police caught two men and a woman committing one of the murders. The suspects attacked the police officers but were arrested and were booked under the names of Sayenko and Suprunyuck, but they were not the men currently on trial. "But now these details are being covered up", Sayenko said in court. "The investigators claim that this did not happen. But there are people, officers in the Militsiya, who on July 19, 2007 received reports that those three were arrested. […] But, alas, it turned out that the persons arrested had powerful parents. So the information was quickly suppressed, and instead my son and two of his friends were railroaded. I also believe that the girl arrested on that day has since left the country and is now in Germany."
The defense team also claimed the prosecution withheld from the court information that exonerated their clients. Igor Sayenko claimed the police interviewed witnesses and recovered evidence from two additional murders. The suspects had a strong alibi for the time of these murders, and so all information on these crimes was removed from the case.
Viktor Sayenko's defense claimed that he had a "psychological dependence" on Igor Suprunyuck, whom they called the ringleader. They claimed that Suprunyuck repeatedly threatened Sayenko, and that Sayenko feared for his life. Sayenko testified in court that he was in constant fear of Suprunyuck since 7th grade.
The strategy of the defense team received some support from the victims' families, who were reportedly dissatisfied with the slow-moving legal process and an alleged cover-up by the investigators. Some victims' relatives told the media they planned to begin an independent organization to monitor the court proceedings. The authorities in Ukraine strongly denied that a fourth person was involved in the killings who could still be at large, and said that rumors of similar crimes taking place since the arrest of the three suspects are unfounded.