It is currently Thu May 24, 2012 10:18 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
 Post subject: Sergey Malinka statement 16.5.2007
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:07 am 
Offline
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:03 pm
Posts: 7110
SERGEY MALINKA

Processo, Volume VI, pages 1453-58 (6 pages)

- translation to be checked = cleaned up google -


AUTO DE EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES


Date of the visit: 2007/05/16 Time: 22:30 Location: DIC Portimão
Entity who chairs:
Employee who performs: John Carlos and Luis Pereira, inspectors
Name: Sergey Malinka
Parents: Ixxx Malinka and Sxxxxxxx Malinka
Natural Town: Saratov
County:
Nationality: Russian Date of birth: 1984/xx/xx
Address: Rua 25 de Abril, xx x, Block x, x xxxxx, apartment x
Postal Code: xxxx-174 Praia da Luz Phone: 914 16x xxx - 282 78x xxx
Marital Status: Single Occupation: Information Technician
Local work: residence indicated
Phone: Fax:
Number of BI: It showed in this act Issued by any document

Informed about the family relations or equivalent with the defendant mentioned in art ° 134, paragraph l of the CPP and the option that you can therefore assist, said there is no such relationship.

Moves to give evidence.

The subject of the file said: ............................................ ........................................
--- Comes to the file as a witness.
--- Although of Russian nationality he fully understands the Portuguese language
in its oral and written forms. He has been in Portugal for nearly seven years.
--- Lives with his parents. Has a Portuguese girlfriend.
--- Asked, said he knows ROBERT MURAT since the summer of last year, he thinks. He came to know him through his neighbour AFONSO R**, who introduced the witness to ROBERT, claiming that he was a good designer of pages and websites. When speaking with ROBERT, he explained the type of page that he was wanting, and the witness performed the work. It was a page of real estate for sale on the Internet, without resorting to a property firm, whose name was http://www.romigen.com. After completing the draft, he returned to him the copyright, as well as the username and password of the administrator. He recalls that the username was a 1 and the password 123, which were altered by ROBERT. After the delivery of the work, he had three weeks to make alteration, as a page of this size needs few changes after entry onto the net. He knows that this enterprise (Romigen) belonged to ROBERT and to a woman of the name MICHAELA, who hardly interfered, but was always present at meetings.
--- Other than this web site, he did not carry out any work for ROBERT or MICHAELA.
--- The meetings to which he refers were carried out a room in ROBERT’s home at Casa Liliana and in the "Baptista" supermarket, which is in Praia da Luz.
--- He confirms that four years ago, he was at the home of ROBERT at the request of his mother, JANE MURAT (sic), to format her computer, so that the operating system would work faster, and to install an antivirus. He did not know ROBERT then, he did not even know that JANE (sic) was his mother. That this contact was established by the Mother through the firm where the witness was working called "125 computers", situated in the EN 125, Mexilhoeira Grande. As his employer failed to pay his salary, he left the firm around three years ago.
--- He has now formed a company called "SERGEY MALINKA", which is not yet on the Interenet, for monetary reasons, since its introduction has high costs.
--- he only has professional contacts with ROBERT, although he was invited to form a joint business together. Which was refused by the witness.
--- The first contact with ROBERT, as already said, was in last Summer, to create the web page, and this occurred near the Church in Praia da Luz, where there was only ROBERT and the witness, he believes at l0H00/11H00. He now alleges that RUI was not present personally, the witness only gave the phone number to ROBERT. The creation of the Internet page took about three weeks to a month. ROBERT paid him €3000 in total, in two equal instalments. The first part of the payment was at the beginning of the work and the second when completed.
--- The second time they met was two or three days later, but does not know where this occurred but believes it was in the "Baptista" supermarket . He does not have an indication of the time. This second meeting was to show him the page, although not complete, he believes on ROBERT’s laptop.
--- His contacts for the meeting were made by phone.
--- The other meetings, it is not known how many, but claims to have been five or six times, occurred in a space of two or three days, where they gave information to the witness to carry out work on the page, or make changes. These meetings were conducted at his house, in the room opposite the gates, where he had the portable thing, in the kitchen and in the "Baptista”. Does not know the specific days, but they were between 10H00 and 12H00 and in the afternoon between 18H00 and 21H00. These will have taken place in the Summer of the past year . In some of those meetings MICHAELA was present.
--- After completing the page, knows that ROBERT was in the UK. During the work, there were some problems with ROBERT, on a professional level, because he demanded changes, and sometimes the witness forgot to perform them.
--- The last time they met was at the request of ROBERT, who called the witness to perform other work and improve the page. The day after the telephone contact he met with him together with MICHAELA. This meeting took place on 30 April 2007, so call the contact occurred on 29. It was held in the “Baptista” supermarket, at 10H00. It was agreed that the witness would try the page, following indications from ROBERT, and the indications would be given by email. The witness’ email: [e-mail address deleted]. The last telephone contact he had with ROBERT, he believes, was on May 11, when the witness was contacted, he thinks, at 16:00. This contact was to draw the attention of the witness, because the page opened incorrectly. He tried to call ROBERT on 14, however he had unplugged the appliance.
--- Describes the days as follows: Wake at 09H00/10H00, have breakfast and leaves to go to deal with professional issues - visits to customers who have contracts and other clients seeking their services. Does not know the localities, or corresponding times. Usually no lunch, returning to the home 18H00/19H00, where he consults his email and calendar. Rarely leaves at night, and when he does, he is accompanied by his girlfriend to go to the cinema or a restaurant. He usually schedules his services the day before he executes them. To travel between services he uses his car "Audi A4, registration 10-xx-xx”.
--- Notes that has all the appointments, with the data/hour and client’s name marked in his MDA of the computer at home.
--- Regarding the day 03 May said that he did not meet, nor speak with Robert. On this day he followed the routine described above.
--- As for the computers he had at home he said that one of them is his property, without brand, and the other two belong to customers, including a customer from Burgau, but he does not know the name, and another from the firm 'Avenue properties", with offices in Lagos and Praia da Luz. In his car he also had a laptop computer which he bought today in the 'People's Radi" brand "Accer", for the sum of 599 pounds.
--- Also in Burgau he has a client by the name of "SALLY", a female, who is an aunt or cousin of ROBERT. She has a home called “Salsalito” near the International School of Burgau. This visit occurred about a week ago, day 08 or 09.
--- With specific reference to the 03 May 2007, the witness confirms to have woken up at his parents’ home, between 09 and 10 hours, having followed his normal business, which is the service and repair of computers. Does not recall which customers were visited, since anything that occurs daily is registered in his MDA. Also does not recollect having lunch that day. He got home by 18H00. Dined with the family and stayed in his room for the rest of the night, using the computer for games, Messenger, internet and may have carried out some repairs to the equipment of any client. The next day, he learnt about the disappearance of a girl, through an image put in the shop window of a shop near to his house, and asked a member of staff what was happening, who also could not explain to him. Had a day without changes, and all tasks he had planned to perform in the business were performed. Claims not to have had any involvement in the efforts that were made by almost all residents, in the search for the missing girl, by the name of MADELEINE. This was due only to lack of time, since he had much work and did not want to miss the commitments to customers. With regard to the telephone contact he received on 03 May 07, at 23:30, held by ROBERT, says that he has no record of having received such a call, but if this actually happened, it was to arrange a meeting with the same, for professional reasons. He affirms not to be protecting ROBERT and never had the intention to take any kind of responsibility, including the activities undertaken by him on the computer. Does not know any element that can contribute for the location of the girl, or for any another kind of explanation of the facts under investigation.
--- No other information to provide for the file.

Has nothing further to add. Read the thought as, ratified and will sign

To appear if this self worked that will be signed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sergey Malinka statement 16.5.2007
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:08 am 
Offline
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:03 pm
Posts: 7110
SERGEY MALINKA

Processo, Volume VI, pages 1453-58 (6 pages)


AUTO DE INQUIRIÇÃO DE TESTEMUNHA


Data da diligência: 2007/05/16 Hora: 22H30 Local: DIC Portimão
Entidade que preside:
Funcionhrio que executa: João Carlos e Luis Pereira, Inspectores
Nome: SERGEY MALINKA
Filiação: Ixxx Malinka e de Sxxxxxxx Malinka
Natural Freguesia: Saratov
Concelho :
Nacionalidade: Russa Data de nascimento: 1984/xx/xx
Residência: Rua 25 de Abril, no x, bloco x, xx xxx, apartamento x
Código Postal: xxxx-174 Praia da Luz Telefone: 914 16x xxx - 282 78x xxx
Estado Civil: Solteiro Profissão: Técnio de Informático
Local trabalho: residência indicada
Telefone: Fax:
Número do B.I.: Não exibiu neste acto Emitido em pelo qualquer documento

Informado sobre as relações familiares ou equiparadas com o arguido enunciadas no art° 134, n.° l do C.P.P., e da faculdade que lhe pode, por isso, assistir, disse que não se verifica nenhuma dessas relações.
Passa a prestar depoimento.

A matéria dos autos disse: ....................................................................................
- - - Vem aos autos na qualidade de testemunha.
- - - Sendo de nacionalidade Russa compreende perfeitamente a Língua Portuguesa na sua forma oral e escrita. Encontra-se em Portugal há cerca de sete anos.
- - - Habita com os seus pais. Tem uma namorada portuguesa.
- - - Perguntado disse que conhece ROBERT MURAT desde o Verão do ano transacto, ao que presume. Que travou conhecimento com ele através do seu vizinho RUI Axxxxx, o qual apresentou o depoente ao ROBERT, alegando que era um bom desenhador de páginas e sítios da Internet. Ao falar com o ROBERT, este explicou-lhe o tipo de página que desejava, tendo o depoente executado o trabalho. Tratava-se de uma página de venda de imóveis na Internet, sem recorrer a uma firma imobiliária, e cuja designação era http://www.romigen.com. Após concluir o desenho devolveu-lhe os direitos de autor, bem como o username e password de administrador. Recorda-se que o username era 1 e a password 123, os quais foram alterados pelo ROBERT. Após a entrega do trabalho e durante três semanas procederam a alterações, uma vez que uma página deste tamanho carece de pequenas mudanças após entrada na rede. Sabe que esta empresa (Romigen) pertencia ao ROBERT e a uma mulher de nome MICHAELA, a qual praticamente não intervinha, mas estava sempre presente nas reuniões.
- - - Além desta página da Internet não efectuou qualquer outro trabalho para o ROBERT ou para a MICHAELA.
- - - As reuniões que atrás se alude eram efectuadas no quarto do ROBERT na Casa Liliana e no supermercado "Baptista", sitio na Praia da Luz.
- - - Assevera ainda que há quatro anos atrás, esteve na casa do ROBERT, a pedido da Mãe desse, JANE MURAT, para formatar o computador dela, por forma a que o sistema operativo funcionasse mais rápido, e instalar um antivirus. Que nessa altura não conhecia o ROBERT, nem sabia que a JANE era Mãe dele. Que esse contacto foi estabelecido pela Mãe para a firma onde trabalhava o depoente designada por "125 computadores", sita na EN 125, Mexilhoeira Grande. Como o patrão não lhe pagou o ordenado, abandonou a firma há cerca de três anos.
- - - Actualmente formou uma empresa com o seu nome "SERGEY MALINKA", a qual ainda não está na Internet, por uma questão monetária, já que a sua introdução tem custos elevados.
- - - Com o ROBERT somente teve contactos profissionais, ainda que aquele o tenha convidado para fazer um negócio junto, o que foi recusado pelo depoente.
- - - O primeiro contacto com o ROBERT, conforme detrás dito, foi no Verão passado, para criarem a página, e ocorreu junto a Igreja da Luz, onde somente se encontrava o ROBERT e o depoente, ao que julga pelas 10H00/11H00. Alega agora que o RUI não os apresentou pessoalmente, somente deu o telefone do ROBERT ao depoente. A criação da página na Internet demorou cerca de três semanas a um mês. O ROBERT pagou-lhe no total, €3000, em duas prestações iguais. A primeira parte do pagamento foi ao início do trabalho e a segunda no final.
- - - A segunda vez que se encontraram foi dois ou três dias depois, não sabendo onde ocorreu, mas pensa ter sido no supermercado" Baptista". Não sabe indicar a hora. Este segundo encontro teve como objectivo exibir-lhe a página, ainda que não concluída, ao que julga no computador portátil do ROBERT.
---Os contactos para os encontros eram efectuados por telemóvel.
--- Os demais encontros, que não sabe quantificar, mas alega terem sido cinco ou seis vezes, ocorriam com um espaço de dois ou três dias, onde eram dadas indicações ao depoente para realizar a página, ou alterações. Estes encontros eram efectuados na casa dele, no quarto defronte dos portões, onde ele tinha o portátil, na cozinha e no "Baptista". Não sabe indicar os dias concretos, mas refere que foram entre as 10H00 e as 12H00 e a tarde entre 18H00 e 21H00. Isto terá ocorrido no Verão do pretérito ano. Nalguns desses encontros a MICHAELA estava presente.
- - - Após ter terminado a página, sabe que o ROBERT foi para o Reino Unido. No decurso do trabalho que realizou, teve alguns problemas com o ROBERT, de cariz profissional, pois aquele pedia alterações e por vezes o depoente olvidava-se de as efectuar.
- - - A Última vez que se encontrou com o ROBERT foi por vontade desse, que ligou ao depoente para efectuar outros trabalhos e melhorar a página. No dia seguinte ao contacto telefónico encontrou-se com ele, o qual estava acompanhado da MICHAELA. Este encontro teve lugar no dia 30 de Abril de 2007, pelo que a chamada de contacto ocorreu dia 29. Teve lugar no supermercado "Baptista", cerca das 1OHOO. Ficou combinado que o depoente trataria da página, por indicação do ROBERT, sendo as indicações dadas por email. O email do depoente é:[edited e-mail address]. O último contacto telefónico que teve com o ROBERT, ao que julga, foi no dia 11 de Maio, sendo este quem ligou ao depoente, pelas 16H00, presume. Este contacto foi para chamar a atenção do depoente, em virtude página abrir de forma incorrecta. Recorda-se de ter tentado ligar para o ROBERT no dia 14, no entanto aquele tinha o aparelho desconectado.
- - - Descreve os seus dias da seguinte forma: Acorda as 09H00/10H00, toma o pequeno almoço e sai para ir tratar de assuntos profissionais - visitas a clientes com quem tem contratos e outros clientes que solicitam os seus serviços. Não sabe indicar os locais, nem horas correspondentes.
Normalmente não almoça, regressando a casa pelas 18H00/19H00, onde consulta o seu email e agenda. Raramente sai pela noite, e quando o faz, é acompanhado da sua namorada para ir ao cinema ou algum restaurante. Habitualmente agenda os serviços a efectuar no dia anterior a sua execução. Nas deslocações entre serviços utiliza a sua viatura "Audi A4", matrícula 10-91-FP.
- - - Refere que tem todas as deslocações, com data/hora e nome de clients marcadas no seu MDA e computador de casa.
- - - No tocante ao dia 03 de Maio disse que não se encontrou, nem falou com o ROBERT. Neste dia efectuou a rotina atrás descrita.
- - - No tocante aos computadores que tinha na sua residência disse que um deles é de sua propriedade, sem marca, e os outros dois são de clientes, designadamente um cliente de Burgau, que não sabe o nome e outro da firma 'Avenida propriedades", com escritório em Lagos e Praia da Luz. Na sua viatura também tinha um computador portátil que comprou hoje na 'Rádio Popular" da marca "Accer", pela quantia de £599.
- - - Também no Burgau tem um cliente de nome "SALLY", do sexo feminino, que será tia ou prima do ROBERT. Esta possui uma residencial junto a Escola Internacional do Burgau que se designa por "Salsalito" Esta visita terá ocorrido há cerca de uma semana, dia 08 ou 09.
- - - No que concerne especificamente ao dia 03 MAIO de 2007, o depoente afirma ter acordado em casa dos seus pais, entre as 09 e as 10 horas, tendo desenvolvido a sua actividade profissional normal, que consiste na assistência e reparação de computadores. Não recorda quais os clientes que visitou, uma vez que tudo o que realiza diariamente se encontra registado na sua MDA. Também não recorda se almoçou nesse dia. Sabe que chegou a casa pelas 18H00. Jantou com a família e ficou o resto da noite no seu quarto, utilizando o computador, para jogos, Messenger, net e talvez tenha procedido a reparação de algum aparelho de um qualquer cliente. No dia seguinte, tomou conhecimento do desaparecimento de uma menina, através de uma imagem colocada na vitrina de uma loja perto de sua casa, tendo perguntado o que se passava ao funcionário da mesma, que também não lhe soube explicar. Teve um dia sem alterações, ou seja, realizou todas as tarefas referentes a actividade que desempenha que houvera previsto realizar. Afirma não ter tido qualquer tipo de participação nas diligências que foram realizadas por quase todos os habitantes da localidade, na procura da menina desaparecida, de nome MADELEINE. Tal facto deveu-se apenas por falta de tempo, uma vez ter bastante trabalho e não poder faltar aos compromissos assumidos com clientes. Relativamente a contacto telefónico que recebeu no dia 03 MAIO 07, pelas 23H30, realizado pelo ROBERT, afirma que não recorda de ter recebido tal comunicação, mas se efectivamente tal aconteceu, terá sido para marcar um encontro com o mesmo, com fins profissionais. Afirma não estar a proteger o ROBERT e nunca ter tido a intenção de por ele assumir qualquer tipo de responsabilidade, nomeadamente as actividades por ele desenvolvidas no computador. Desconhece qualquer elemento que possa contribuir para a localização da menina, ou para qualquer outro tipo de esclarecimento dos factos em investigação.
- - - Não tem outros elementos a fornecer para os autos.

E mais não disse. Lido o auto o achou conforme, ratifica e vai assinar.

Para constar se lavrou o presente auto que vai ser assinado


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sergey Malinka statement 16.5.2007
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:45 am 
Offline
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:03 pm
Posts: 7110
Document linked in TOC


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sergey Malinka statement 16.5.2007
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:31 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin
Forum Admin

Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:50 pm
Posts: 7594
Processos Vol XVI
Page 4184

To: The Instruction Judge
Lagos Judicial Court


I, Sergey Malinka, previously identified in the process files, come to request the following:

1. As explained in a previous request, on 16th May 2007 at about 15.00, the Portimao PJ carried out searches in my residence (see document joined to my previous request).
2. On the night of 16th – 17th May I was heard exhaustively at the Portimao PJ installations in my quality as witness.
3. On 17th May 2007 at the end of the afternoon all material was returned to me that had been apprehended on the previous evening, with the exception of a Sony portable computer, model Vaio PGC-6H4L, with series number 281992303103495 and the rest of the material that was taken from my home on 17th May for future analysis.
4. The PJ promised me at that moment that the material in point nº3 would be returned to me in a week’s time (!!!)
5. Until now (ten months later!) nothing has been returned to me and this situation continues to cause me serious harm and difficulty in my professional life.
6. I request that you order the return of the apprehended items, with maximum urgency, ordering its return to me, by


** Following page is missing.



(Doc linked in TOC)

_________________
ines753@etb.net.co


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  



Free forum hosting is powered by phpBB. Style by the CodeMiles Team.

All the statements, opinions and comments made on this forum are done on a matter of public interest and under the right of freedom of speech as stated in Article 37 of the Portuguese Constitution, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and UN's Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.