Conviction Divination and fortune-telling services Kytmanovsky District, Altai Krai, Russia · 2020

Russia: a second curse-removal prosecution in the same rural district court, 114,000 roubles from two women

Record class

Core record

Evidence status

Convicted

Authority role

a woman who told each of two victims that a curse was on her and that she could cure it, and was admitted to their homes on that basis

Organization

Kytmanovsky District Court, Altai Krai (Кытмановский районный суд Алтайского края)

Archive classification

This is the archive's application of its published inclusion test. The cited record appears below.

The authority is the defendant's claimed capacity to identify and cure a porcha. As in the companion prosecution before the same court, the judgment records that she initiated each encounter by announcing the diagnosis unprompted, and that it was the offer to remove the curse which secured her admission to the victim's home and the surrender of the money. The claim to spiritual competence is what converted a conversation in a yard into access to a household's savings.

Curse or witchcraft threat
Spiritual healing or treatment

Scope decision

The defendant is not named. Russian courts anonymise published judgments as a matter of course, and this record identifies the case by number and court — case no. 1-11/2020 (also numbered 1-97/2019), UID 22RS0031-01-2019-000390-82, Kytmanovsky District Court, Altai Krai — in accordance with CODEBOOK §10. The victims appear as the initials K. and Zh. and are not named. This is a SEPARATE prosecution from case no. 1-25/2020 before the same court, which the archive holds as a distinct record, and the two are not double-counted: the case numbers, UIDs, presiding judges, offence dates, victims and sums all differ, and the recorded prior-conviction histories establish that the two defendants are different people — this defendant was sentenced by the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Barnaul and paroled in June 2014, while the defendant in 1-25/2020 was sentenced by the Krasnogorsky District Court in 2011 and paroled in March 2017. Both had prior convictions under the same fraud article. The three-year term is the aggregate under ч.2 ст.69 and is suspended: it is not a period in custody. The judgment states an appellate route but records no appellate outcome for this case, and none was found.

Evidence structure

Proceedings

2020-01-19 · conviction and sentence at first instance

Kytmanovsky District Court, Altai Krai, Russia (Кытмановский районный суд Алтайского края). The defendant, anonymised in the published judgment as ФИО1, was convicted on two counts of fraud causing significant damage to a citizen under ч.2 ст.159 of the Criminal Code, for offences committed in July 2019 against two victims recorded by the initials K. and Zh. In each case the court found she told the victim a curse was on her which she could cure, was admitted to the house on that basis, and took the victim's money under the pretext of removing it — 39,000 roubles from K. and 75,000 roubles from Zh., a total of 114,000 roubles, the damage being significant in each case in light of the victim's material circumstances. She received two years on each count, aggregated by partial addition under ч.2 ст.69 to three years' deprivation of liberty, suspended under ст.73 with a three-year probationary period. The court found recidivism as an aggravating circumstance and recorded unspent prior convictions, including two earlier convictions under ч.2 ст.159 at the Biysky District Court of Altai Krai in April and September 2015, and a deferral of sentence under ст.82 until her child reaches the age of 14.

Documented coercion mechanisms

an unsolicited diagnosis delivered in conversation in the victim's yard: «на ней «порча», которую она может вылечить»
the removal of the curse used as the pretext for entering the house, to which each victim invited or admitted her
targeting of victims for whom the loss was significant in light of their material circumstances, as the court found in each count

Cited record

Sources

court of record criminal judgment Приговор № 1-11/2020 1-97/2019 от 19 января 2020 г. по делу № 1-11/2020, Кытмановский районный суд (Алтайский край) — Уголовное. УИД 22RS0031-01-2019-000390-82.: The full text of the criminal judgment, read directly from the Russian judgments database sudact.ru. For the first victim the court records that the defendant «пояснила К., что на ней «порча», которую она может вылечить, тем самым, умышленно, путем обмана ввела в заблуждение К.», and that K., «находясь под действием обмана, не подозревая об истинных преступных намерениях», «предложила ей пройти в дом, где ФИО1, продолжая реализовывать свой преступный умысел, под предлогом снятия «порчи», путем обмана, введя в заблуждение К., похитила денежные средства последней в сумме 39 000 рублей, ущерб для которой, является значительным в связи с ее материальным положением». The second count follows the same form in respect of Zh., who «позволила ФИО1 остаться в доме», with a loss of 75,000 roubles. The operative part convicts on both counts under ч.2 ст.159, imposes two years on each, aggregates to three years under ч.2 ст.69 and suspends under ст.73 with a three-year probationary period. The judgment records the defendant's prior convictions, including at the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Barnaul and at the Biysky District Court in April and September 2015 under ч.2 ст.159, and a deferral under ст.82.

Source provenance

Source access and integrity log

This log records source retrieval and file integrity. It does not mean that an automated process independently confirmed every statement in the source.

Source and tier basis: https://sudact.ru/regular/doc/2BWdYdtYzrJC/ Corpus classification: court-of-record; evidentiary role: criminal-judgment.
Retrieval: 2026-07-29 · Preserved; Bound by Fear research cycle 2026-07-29 (Russian-language sweep; full judgment read via the browser pane; both counts, the sums, the aggregation under ч.2 ст.69, the suspension under ст.73 and the prior-conviction history taken verbatim from the judgment; distinctness from case 1-25/2020 before the same court established by comparing case numbers, UIDs, presiding judges, offence dates, victims, sums and prior-conviction histories)

Named in this record? Request a correction, report a changed disposition, or submit a response.

Related record

Related cases · Divination and fortune-telling services

Browse all 80 Divination and fortune-telling services records

← Explore all cases