Case 1 – Criminal Case "Attempted Murder"

⚠ Important Note

The verdict of the Berlin Regional Court of 22.07.2024 is not final in the constitutional sense — on 30.07.2025 the court retroactively inserted a list of applied legal norms into the already final verdict, even though the appeal proceedings had already been concluded without this list. Bagrash has filed a constitutional complaint.

Defendant	Dmitry Bagrash, born in Moscow, resident in Berlin since 1992
Charge	Attempted murder, attempted arson causing death, subsidy fraud (COVID), electricity theft
Verdict	22 July 2024 — 5 years and 4 months' imprisonment
Court	Berlin Regional Court I, 22nd Major Criminal Chamber
Presiding judge	VRiLG Groß
Prosecution	OStA Wachs, General Public Prosecutor's Office Berlin
BGH ruling	07.05.2025 — appeal dismissed (5th Criminal Senate)
Constitutional complaint	Filed with BVerfG (Az. 2 BvR 964/25)
Current location	JVA Heidering, Ernst-Stargardt-Allee 1, 14979 Großbeeren

Key Contradictions: Facts vs. Verdict

DNA: The device bore DNA from three persons: Bagrash, an unknown man, and an unknown woman. These persons were never identified or investigated.

Witness Basirov: Filmed the suspect — did not identify Bagrash as the perpetrator. The court held, without any expert opinion, that Bagrash appeared in the footage.

Expert opinion: At the location (basement shaft, no air supply) the device was physically incapable of igniting. The matches had lain in the rain for 13 days.

Retroactive verdict amendment 30.07.2025: More than a year after sentencing and after the BGH ruling, the court inserted an extensive list of legal norms — treating this as a mere "clerical correction". Bagrash has filed a further constitutional complaint.

OSCE: At OSCE meetings in 2021 and 2022 the Russian delegation expressly named Unkremlin e.V. as a politically dangerous organisation — the court described Bagrash's activities as "insignificant".

Criminal Case "Attempted Murder"

Key Contradictions: Facts vs. Verdict

📁 Google Drive — Case 1