Open hypotheses — expressly not as proven facts

Bagrash formulates four hypotheses for which, at the current stage of analysis, there is no direct evidence of an instruction, agreement or benefit in return: (1) deliberate use of Pavlo S. to gather information/provoke, (2) a connection between a sentence for Pavlo S. perceived as lenient and his behaviour towards Bagrash, (3) renewed physical proximity as an attempt to exert psychological pressure, (4) possible protection of or influence over the institution’s management by a higher authority — Bagrash names Berlin’s Senator for Justice, Dr. Felor Badenberg, as someone who may bear political responsibility.

Regarding the criminal proceedings against Pavlo S.: Bagrash says that he read the case documents himself — he acted as a Russian translator for Pavlo S. and helped him understand his own indictment. According to this direct knowledge of the case file, Pavlo S. was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment for striking a fellow countryman on the head six times with a construction hammer, fracturing his skull and then drowning him in the Wuhle after establishing that the victim was still alive. Public reports on the trial dated 17.06.2024 (Berliner Zeitung, B.Z., Polizei Berlin) confirm the course of events (hammer blows, drowning in the Wuhle) and mention a judgment scheduled for 18.07.2024; the research conducted so far found no freely accessible confirmation of the specific sentence of ten years. The length of the sentence is therefore presented as a direct statement by Bagrash based on his own knowledge of the case file, but editorially still lacks an independent second source.