Аннотация: A brief memoirs about Rostov legal journalism of the late nineties - the beginning of the two thousandths (Bulletins "Tax Expert", "Litigation" ...).
A brief memoirs about Rostov legal journalism of the late nineties - the beginning of the two thousandths (Bulletins 'Tax Expert', "Litigation" ...).
Some memories of the Rostov (legal) journalism of the late nineties - early two thousandths, I decided to make a history.
The newspaper "Priazovsky Krai" ('Приазовский край') was published by the joint-stock company "Priazovsky Krai". This was a general newspaper that reported on almost everything that interested a wide range of readers.
I helped the chief editor of "Priazovsky Krai" - let's call him Vinogradov - with a positive result for him, get out of a trial initiated against him by some offended citizen.
Through Vinogradov, I met his good friend - let's call him conditionally Artyom Sergeevich.
For some reason, Vinogradov treated Artyom Sergeevich with great respect.
I assume that during the period of his business success, Artyom Sergeevich was placing a money [a profitable] advertising at Vinogradov's newspaper.
Vinogradov, apparently, felt my silent question, and somehow mentioned that Artyom Sergeevich's uncle published the newspaper "Priazovsky Krai" back in the days of the revolution. It is unlikely that these two newspapers were legally interconnected. But the presence of a relative of the the "first" (the "original") editor imparted historical depth and additional respectability to the case (to the business). It is possible that at the time of the uncle this newspaper was published in Nakhichevan (city located near Rostov-on-Don).
Artyom Sergeevich was in a state of permanent long-standing disputes - some dishonest person deceived him, the business collapsed, the capital disappeared, the characters gradually left the stage, but Artem Sergeevich continued to argue. Some officials told him privately that they thought he was crazy.
The collapse of the business did not interfere with Vinogradov's relationship with Artyom Sergeevich. Perhaps the roles have changed - Vinogradov became a successful boss, and Artem Sergeevich - a junior partner - who was providing all possible assistance to the boss, giving useful advice.
Vinogradov and I became the official founders of the 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ("Tax Expert") bulletin [newsletter] (бюллетень 'Налоговый эксперт'). This bulletin [newsletter] was supposed to discuss various kinds of tax issues.
For some reason, Artem Sergeevich was not included in the founders - I don't remember the details now.
Vinogradov was, moreover, a correspondent for one of the federal newspapers.
When I prepared an application to the federal body that dealt with the registration of the media, when sent the documents by mail, he was skeptical about this plan.
When the Registration Certificate of 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert') arrived by the mail, he was surprised.
The benefit of the right to send editorial inquiries was discovered. It was a useful right, with the obligation of certain addressees to respond within a set time limit. Vinogradov never did this.
The 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert') had three types of problems.
This bulletin was printing in a typography. This required regular payment.
The bulletin was sold through the Soyuzpechat kiosks. But there were some tricks here. The bulletin could lie closest to the window, or it could be obscured by other publications. What interest did the stalls' sellers have in putting 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert') in front of the eyes of buyers?
Gradually I lost interest in tax issues. On the contrary, issues of legal theory, law enforcement, stories about specific cases came to the fore.
At about the same time, problems appeared at the "Priazovsky Krai".
Vinogradov, as a correspondent for a central newspaper, regularly attended court hearings where the Chikatilo case was considered.
Artyom Sergeevich has repeatedly spoken out in the sense that this case is unique, and that Vinogradov could write a unique book about Chikatilo.
At some point, Vinogradov began to write such a book. I don't know how successful this book was - in terms of sales. The topic is very gloomy, not cheerful.
However, there was a version that this book is being actively bought (the book was published by the joint-stock company "Priazovsky Krai").
Artyom Sergeevich believed that the joint-stock company "Priazovsky Krai" did not pay fee to Vinogradov in full, that he needed to defend his rights in court.
Vinogradov at some point agreed to sue.
At this stage, I explained to Vinogradov that an unpleasant situation was arising - not only he himself, but also some of his relatives were employed in the "Priazovsky Krai".
Vinogradov took useful, and even advantageous, preventive measures. It turned out that his influence is enough to employ one of his relatives in a better way than in the "Priazovsky Krai".
The case began to be heard in court. The main burden of legal preparations fell on me. Naturally, I worked in this case without payment.
The whole plot was quite complicated - at first the question concerned the legality of Vinogradov's demands.
"Priazovsky Krai" agreed to voluntarily pay Vinogradov an amount equal to the cost of a one-room apartment.
Artyom Sergeevich believed that this amount was clearly underestimated, insufficient.
My opinion was this.
If I advise to Vinogradov to take the money offered and complete the process, then there will always be a reason to mentally return to the events and regret that Vinogradov did not fight (not win) the whole amount - in full.
And if I advise Vinogradov to continue the trial, it is not known whether he will be succeeded to get money.
So, I suggested Vinogradov in this situation to make a decision on his own.
He decided to continue his participation in the trial.
The decision was in his favor.
But where to get the money?
A new stage has begun - connected with the payment of money.
The car, already under arrest, was stolen to somewhere in distant lands, and then rendered unusable.
The main representative of the opposing side, apparently having invested a lot in defense against creative claims, fainted with a heart attack before the decision was made, and he was taken away by an ambulance.
As a result of all the efforts, both the joint-stock company and the newspaper "Priazovsky Krai" gradually completed their activities.
Gradually came to naught and 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert').
Vinogradov was against going beyond the scope of tax issues.
I had - already on my own - to register the 'Sudebnyy protsess' ("Litigation") bulletin (бюллетень 'Судебный процесс'). This bulletin discussed issues of theory, and the transformation of the judicial system, as well as individual cases.
Cooperation with Vinogradov and Artyom Sergeevich continued.
Vinogradov's influence and experience were always useful.
Artyom Sergeevich had an excellent sense (feeling) of the Russian language and had a great abilities for newspaper business.
He went to the courts with pleasure and handed out a bulletin printed on an A4 sheet on both sides and multiplied on a duplicating machine.
Once he told how he opened the door to the judge's office, but the judge was engrossed in reading the bulletin and did not pay any attention to Artyom Sergeyevich.
There were no problems with the production (printing) and distribution of 'Sudebnyy protsess' ("Litigation"). But the cash flow from the sale - just as in the case of 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert'), - did not arise.
At this time, a newspaper appeared, which, as my memory tells me (clarifications are possible), was called "Press-kriminal Yuga Rossii" ('Пресс-криминал Юга России'), and which was established by the oblast court.
One of the reasons for the emergence of this newspaper was the organization and the beginning of the activities of the jury (trial by jury). This topic needed coverage.
I cannot confirm this, but I suspect that in Russia at that time there were two newspapers with the main legal subject (a bulletin and a newspaper) - and both of them were published in the city of Rostov-on-Don.
Somewhere I read a good wording: how the original sin of all lnewspapers with the main legal theme is determined.
This original sin consists in the fact that, gradually, the employees of legal newspapers have a question: why are substantially different decisions made in almost identical cases?
This original sin gradually draws (directs) the newspapers with the main legal theme to the end of their activities.
It seems to me personally that there is nothing wrong with the existence of legal newspapers.
The 'Sudebnyy protsess' ("Litigation") continued to function, Vinogradov and I were moving away from each other.
He - since the trial of Chikatilo? - continued to be interested in legal issues. Traveled to neighboring regions and territories.
One day he arrived home, lay on the couch for several days and died.
I confess that his death made an unpleasant impression on me.
What was to be done with 'Nalogovyy ekspert' ('Tax Expert'), where we were both founders?
The state's policy towards the media gradually exchanged.
If at first there was a period when the rapid development of the media was declared an achievement of state policy, then gradually the situation changed, the rules changed in the direction of burdening media workers.
Some woman from the local registration authority bombarded me with small but unpleasant demands.
Comparing the pros and cons, I decided to end the activities of the 'Sudebnyy protsess' ('Litigation'). It was relatively easy to do this - since I could make the appropriate decision alone.
Gradually, any information about the 'Press-kriminal Yuga Rossii' also ceased to come. I assume that this newspaper also ended its existence.
After all this period, I have not changed my point of view - as before, I am convinced of the usefulness of a legal journalism.
It's my brief recollections.
July 29, 2022 15:10
Translation from Russian into English: July 29, 2022 19:00.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Краткие мемуары о ростовской юридической журналистике конца девяностых - начале двухтысячных (Бюллетени 'Налоговый эксперт', 'Судебный процесс' ...)'.
{ 3112. Краткие мемуары о ростовской юридической журналистике конца девяностых - начале двухтысячных (Бюллетени 'Налоговый эксперт', 'Судебный процесс' ...).
MMMLXXXIII. A brief memoirs about Rostov legal journalism of the late nineties - the beginning of the two thousandths (Bulletins 'Tax Expert', "Litigation" ...).
Vladimir Zalessky Internet-bibliotheca. Интернет-библиотека Владимира Залесского}