A third co-conspirator, Alexander Hanzha
(Ukr: Олександр Ганжа, Rus: Александр Ганжа), was charged with two
armed robberies that took place before the murder spree.
On February 11, 2009, all three defendants were
found guilty. Suprunyuck and Sayenko were sentenced to life
imprisonment, while Hanzha received nine years in prison. The
lawyers for Suprunyuck and Sayenko launched an appeal, which was
dismissed by the Supreme Court of Ukraine in November 2009.
Murders
The first two murders took place late at night
on June 25, 2007. The first victim was a 33-year-old local woman
named Ekaterina Ilchenko, who was walking home after having tea at
her female friend's apartment. According to Sayenko's confession,
he and Suprunyuck were "out for a walk". Suprunyuck had a hammer.
As Ilchenko walked past, Suprunyuck "spun around" and struck her
in the side of the head. Ilchenko's body was found by her mother
at 5 AM.
Within an hour of the first murder, the two men
attacked their next victim, Roman Tatarevich. He was sleeping on a
bench a short walk away from the first murder scene. Tatarevich's
head was smashed with blunt objects numerous times, rendering him
unrecognizable. The bench he was discovered on was located across
the street from the local Public Prosecutor's office.
On July 1, two more victims, Evgeniya
Grischenko and Nikolai Serchuk, were found murdered in the nearby
town of Novomoskovsk.
On the night of July 6, three more people were
murdered in Dnepropetrovsk. The first was Egor Nechvoloda, a
recently discharged army recruit, who was bludgeoned while walking
home from a night club. His mother found the body in the morning
by their apartment building on Bohdan Khmelnytsky Street. Elena
Shram, a 28-year-old night guard, was then murdered around the
corner on Kosiora Street.
According to Sayenko's taped confession, as
Shram walked towards them, Suprunyuck struck her with the hammer
he had been hiding under his shirt and struck her several more
times after she fell down. She had been carrying a bag filled with
clothes. The men picked up the bag, used the clothes to clean the
hammer, and threw the bag out. Later the same night, the men
murdered a woman named Valentina Hanzha (no apparent relation to
co-defendant Alexander Hanzha), a mother of three married to a
disabled husband.
The next day, July 7, two 14-year-old boys from
Podgorodnoye, a nearby village, were attacked in broad daylight as
they went fishing. One of the two friends, Andrei Sidyuck, was
killed, but the other, Vadim Lyakhov, managed to escape.
On July 12, a 48-year-old man named Sergei
Yatzenko, disabled by a recent bout with cancer, went missing
while riding his Dnepr motorcycle. His body was found four days
later, with signs of a savage attack clearly visible even after
four days in the summer heat.
Thirteen more murders followed, often with
multiple bodies found in the same day. In addition to the earlier
sprees, two victims were found every day from July 14 through 16.
Victims were seemingly selected at random. Many were vulnerable to
attack, including women, children, elderly, vagrants, or people
under the influence of alcohol.
Most of the victims were killed using blunt
objects, including hammers and steel construction bars. Blows were
often directed at the victims' faces, leaving them unrecognizable.
Many victims were also mutilated and tortured, and some had their
eyes gouged out while they were still alive. One of the victims
was a pregnant woman, whose fetus was cut out of her womb. No
sexual assaults on any victims were reported.
Some of the victims were also robbed of their
cell phones and other valuables, with their possessions pawned to
a large network of second-hand shops in the area. However, most
victims had their possessions intact.
The murders spanned a large geographical area.
In addition to the city of Dnepropetrovsk itself, many took place
in the outlying areas of the Dnepropetrovsk Oblast.
Investigation
No official link between the murders was made
until the July 7 attack on two boys in Podgorodnoye. Vadim Lyakhov,
the survivor, was initially placed under arrest, suspected of
murdering his friend. He was reportedly denied access to counsel
and beaten by police during questioning. However, it quickly
became clear that he was not responsible for his friend's death,
and that the murder was connected with the murder spree. Lyakhov
сooperated with the investigators to create sketches of the
attackers.
Several days later, on July 14, a 45-year-old
woman named Natalia Mamarchuk was riding her scooter in the nearby
village of Diyovka. As she was passing through a wooded area, two
men ran towards her and knocked her down. They then took out a
hammer or a pipe and bludgeoned her to death as she lay on the
ground. After she stopped moving, the men then jumped on her
scooter and drove off. The attack was witnessed from a distance by
many locals. They gave chase, but quickly lost sight of the
attackers.
Two local children also witnessed the attack
from up close, hidden in a tent just a few feet away from where
Mamarchuk was murdered. They provided a detailed description that
matched the one given by Lyakhov. A task force was quickly set up
from Kiev, headed by Lead Criminal Investigator Vasily Paskalov.
The manhunt soon grew to encompass most of the local law
enforcement. Reportedly over 2,000 investigators were working on
the case.
The investigation was initially kept secret. No
official information about the murders was released, and local
people were not warned about possible attacks or provided with
descriptions of the suspects. However, rumors of the attacks kept
most of the local population home at night.
Eventually, the investigators selectively
distributed sketches and lists of stolen property to local pawn
shops. Stolen property began to appear in the pawn shops of the
city's Leninskiy district. The combination of the sketches and
located stolen property led quickly to the suspects..
Arrest and trial
The three suspects were arrested on July 23,
2007. Suprunyuck attempted to sell a mobile phone stolen from one
of the victims in a local pawn shop, asking for 150 hryvnia (about
US $20). When the phone was turned on to show that it worked, its
location was traced by law enforcement agents. Suprunyuck and
Sayenko were arrested near the cash register of the shop.
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 8 more attacks
where the 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, dropped out of the case after reportedly being
disappointed at failing to have a plea of insanity for his client
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.
Suspects
The three suspects were lifelong friends who
attended school together.
According to interviews with the suspects'
families, Sayenko and Hanzha were friends from an early age.
Suprunyuck moved to the area later, and the three became friends
in the third grade. The two other boys had been good students
before making friends with Suprunyuck, when their grades began to
slip. One of their teachers reported that Suprunyuck was shy and
withdrawn, but always picking fights and getting into trouble.
By the fifth grade, the boys had their first
brush with the law when they were caught throwing rocks at passing
trains.
By the eighth grade the three suspects had
found some more common ground. "Me and Igor [Suprunyuck ] were
both afraid of heights, and we were afraid we'd be beaten up by
bullies", Sayenko stated during questioning. Suprunyuck went
looking for advice on getting rid of their fears, which led the
two boys to stand on a balcony of their 14th floor apartment for
hours, hanging over the railing. This reportedly had a positive
effect on their fear of heights.
Hanzha was reportedly the most squeamish of the
three. He had blood phobia, and would even refuse to give a bath
to his kitten, afraid he might scald it. Suprunyuck suggested
tackling the fears by torturing stray dogs. The boys would capture
dogs in a wooded area near their house, hang them from trees,
disembowel them, and take pictures standing next to the corpses.
Prosecution evidence included many of these photos taken by the
underage suspects. Some photos show the boys drawing swastikas and
other symbols with animal blood, and giving the Hitler salute. In
one photo, Suprunyuck poses sporting a "Hitler moustache".
Suprunyuck was born on April 20, the same day as Adolf Hitler, and
often made references to the fact.
A long video showing the three torturing a
white kitten was shown in court. It takes place in their garage.
The suspects fashion a cross out of two wooden boards and nail the
kitten to it, then shoot at it with two pistols, placing foam and
glue in its mouth in order to muffle the kitten's screams.
When the boys were 17, Suprunyuck beat up a
local boy and stole his bike, which he then sold to Sayenko. Both
were arrested, but did not go to jail due to their age.
After high school, Hanzha drifted between odd
jobs, which included a pastry chef and a construction worker. At
the time of the arrest he had been unemployed for some time.
Sayenko went to a metallurgy institute part-time and worked as a
security guard. Suprunyuck remained officially unemployed, but
made a living driving his green Daewoo Lanos as an unlicensed
taxi. The car was reportedly a birthday gift from his parents.
Some months before the murder spree began,
Suprunyuck - with the help of Sayenko and Hanzha - began picking
up passengers and robbing them. A green Daewoo with a taxicab's
checkerboard marking was often described as the vehicle used in
the murders. According to the suspects' confessions, some of the
murder victims were picked up as passengers in Suprunyuck's
unlicensed cab. Hanzha reportedly participated in a single
incident where two men were robbed, and subsequently declined to
take part in any further attacks.
Local media reported that the suspects had
wealthy influential parents with ties to local law enforcement.
Vladimir Suprunyuck, Igor Suprunyuck's father, in his interview to
Segodnya stated that he had been employed at Yuzhmash as a
test pilot, often flying with Leonid Kuchma, the future president
of Ukraine, and continuing to serve as his personal pilot on
domestic flights after Kuchma's rise to power.
Local authorities, including deputy interior
minister Nikolay Kupyanskiy, initially referred to the supposed
influence of the suspects' families, but later denied the
assessment, claiming that all three suspects came from poor
families. However, Viktor Sayenko was represented in court by his
father Igor Sayenko, a lawyer.
Motive
The prosecution did not establish a specific
motive behind the killings. Local media reported that the killers
had a plan to get rich from the murder videos that they recorded.
One of the suspects' girlfriends reported that they were planning
to make forty videos of separate murders. This was corroborated by
the suspects' former classmate, who claimed that he often heard
Suprunyuck was in contact with an unknown "rich foreign website
operator" who ordered forty snuff videos, and would pay a large
sum of money once they were made.
Regional security chief Ivan Stupak rejected
the claim that the murders had been committed to make Internet
snuff videos, saying that no evidence had come to light during the
investigation that supported the claim. Detective Bogdan Vlasenko
stated: "We think they were doing it as a hobby, to have a
collection of memories when they get old." Deputy interior
minister Nikolay Kupyanskiy commented "For these young men, murder
was like entertainment or hunting."
The legal team defending the suspects consisted
of three lawyers, one assigned to each suspect. All three lawyers
were originally court-appointed, but after the initial hearings
Viktor Sayenko requested to be represented by his father instead
of his previous lawyer, who had apparently graduated from law
school only two months earlier.
The request was granted, leading to a
significant delay in the proceedings as Sayenko's father
familiarized himself with multiple volumes of evidence. Igor
Sayenko became the most prominent figure on the defense side,
giving numerous interviews and taking a leading role in the 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 the spree
began, in which two men were robbed in the nearby town of
Dniprodzerzhynsk. Hanzha fully 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 shown in the murder videos were
the suspects, claiming that they are recognized instantly as
different individuals.
In an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda,
a major Russian-language newspaper, 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 interviews with an escaped victim who wanted his
identity kept secret out of 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 in the act of 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 that the
prosecution was withholding from the court information that
exonerated their clients. Igor Sayenko claimed that 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, saying that he had been 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 as well as an
alleged cover-up by the investigators. Some of the victims'
relatives stated to the media that they planned to set up 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.
Murder videos and photographs
The suspects' cell phones and personal
computers contained multiple video recordings of the murders
taking place. One full video was leaked to the Internet, showing
the murder of 48-year-old Sergei Yatzenko. He is seen laying on
his back in a wooded area, and is struck repeatedly in the face
with a hammer held inside a plastic bag. One of the attackers
pokes out Yatzenko's eyes, and stabs him in the abdomen with a
screwdriver. Yatzenko is then struck with the hammer in order to
ensure that he is dead. The attack lasts over four minutes, during
which the victim lapses in and out of consciousness. One of the
murderers can be seen smiling towards the camera during the video.
The murderers walk back to their car, showing
that the crime took place only a few feet away from the side of a
road, next to their parked car. They discuss the murder calmly,
expressing mild amazement that the victim was still breathing
after a screwdriver was plunged into his exposed brain. The
suspects then wash their hands and the hammer with a water bottle,
and begin to laugh. Only two suspects appear to be present in the
video, with one always behind the camera.
The suspects were also found in possession of
multiple photographs showing them attending funerals of the
victims. They can be seen smiling and "flipping off" the coffins
and gravestones. Evidence of animal abuse was also shown in court,
with the suspects posing alongside mutilated animal corpses.
The photographic and video evidence was shown
in court on October 29, 2008, as part of a larger presentation of
over 300 photographs and two videos.
The defense objected to the presentation,
claiming that the evidence was obtained illegally, and that the
subjects shown in the video and the photographs were digitally
altered to resemble the suspects. When Suprunyuck and Sayenko were
asked if they recognized the people in the photographs, they
replied that they did not. Judge Ivan Senchenko responded by
stating "You are not blind."
Valery Voronyuck, an expert on film and video
editing, testified to the court that in his view the video
material had not been faked or altered in any way. The court
rejected all the objections raised by the defense, and accepted
the prosecution's argument that the material was genuine, and
showed the suspects in the act of murdering their victims.
The victim
in the video
Yatzenko had another brush with death sixteen
years earlier. While working at a farm, he lost control of his
tractor and rolled downhill into a river. Instead of jumping out,
he stayed in the cabin trying to save his vehicle, and became
pinned underwater. By the time he was freed, Yatzenko was
clinically dead, but was resuscitated. Doctors called his survival
"one in a thousand".
At around 2:30 PM on the day of the murder, he
called his wife to let her know he was riding his old Dnepr
motorcycle to see his grandchild. He never arrived at his son's
house, and his cell phone was turned off by 6 PM. His wife
Lyudmila called a friend and walked around the village, afraid
that her husband might have fallen ill or had a motorcycle
accident. They were unable to locate any signs of him. They were
also unable to file a missing person's report, since in the
Ukraine a person cannot be declared missing until at least 72
hours after last being seen. The next day, Lyudmila posted
photographs of her husband around the village, and enlisted more
local help to search the surrounding area. Four days later, a
local who saw one of Lyudmila's posters remembered that he had
seen an abandoned Dnepr bike in a remote wooded area by a garbage
dump. He took Yatzenko's relatives to the scene, where they
discovered his mutilated and decomposing body.
The fact that Yatzenko's murder was captured on
video was unknown to the public until a court session on October
29, 2008. The unedited video of the murder was shown as part of a
large presentation by the prosecution, causing shock in the
audience. The court agreed with the prosecution that the video was
genuine, that it showed Igor Suprunyuck attacking the victim, and
that Viktor Sayenko was the man behind the camera.
The video showing the murder of Sergei Yatzenko
was leaked to a shock site based in the United States and dated
December 4, 2008. Ekaterina Levchenko, adviser to Ukraine's
Minister of the Interior, was critical of the leak, but admitted
that control of videos on the Internet was "virtually impossible".
Caitlin Moran of The Times watched part
of the video and recalled her reaction in her column in January
2009. Parts of the video have become a viral video known as
3Guys1Hammer, a pun on another famous shock video, 2 Girls 1
Cup. Some YouTube users have posted videos recording their
reactions while watching the murder video.
They also received fifteen years sentences
after being found guilty on the robbery charges. Alexander Hanzha,
who was not involved in the killings, was found guilty of robbery
and sentenced to nine years in prison.
All three were also found guilty on the animal
cruelty charges. Hanzha said of Suprunyuck and Sayenko: "If I had
known the atrocities that they were capable of committing, I would
have not gone near them at gunpoint." The judge stated in the
verdict that the motive for the crimes had been a desire for "morbid
self-affirmation". Referring to the accused, the court noted "the
poverty of their emotional world, and their absence of interest in
people and moral standards."
The court's verdict was several hundred pages
long and was read out over a period of two days. The lawyers for
Suprunyuck and Sayenko announced their intention to appeal, saying
that the authenticity of the photographic and video evidence had
not been established beyond reasonable doubt. The claim was
dismissed by Edmund Saakian, a lawyer for one of the victims'
families, who commented: "In theory a photo can be faked, but to
fake a forty minute video would require a studio and a whole year."
Larissa Dovgal, a representative of the victims' families, claimed
that other perpetrators involved in the crimes could still be at
large.
The parents of Igor Suprunyuck and Viktor
Sayenko repeated their belief in the innocence of their sons.
Vladimir Suprunyuck claimed that Igor had been tortured in order
to extract his confession, with the police covering his head and
forcing him to inhale cigarette smoke. Speaking at a televised
press conference, Vladimir Suprunyuck cited irregularities during
the investigation, and said that the case against his son was
false.
Igor Sayenko claimed that his son had been made
a scapegoat, and that the crimes had been committed by the
relatives of senior officials. The parents plan to appeal to the
Supreme Court of Ukraine and the European Court of Human Rights.
The parents of Suprunyuck and Sayenko also argued that the
sentence on Alexander Hanzha had been too lenient. An opinion poll
conducted in Dnepropetrovsk found that 50.3% of people believed
that the sentence was fair, and 48.6% believed that the sentence
should have been more severe.
Appeal
On August 18, 2009, the Supreme Court of
Ukraine referred the case back to the Dnepropetrovsk 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.
|