Russia Denied the “Right of Discovery” in Skripal Affair. Moscow Demands Release of Relevant Documents


(Home – Stephen Lendman). 

Contact at [email protected].

Pre-trial judicial proceedings in America and elsewhere afford all parties the right to as much information as possible – so nothing is kept secret except for constitutional protection from self-incrimination.

Defendants especially have the right to relevant documents, witness depositions, questions and answers from interrogations, crime scene and other forensic evidence including toxicology results, police reports, “raw evidence,” arrest and search warrants, grand jury testimony, and other relevant data.

The purpose of discovery is to assure judicial fairness, or at least greater fairness than otherwise possible.

Prosecutors are required to provide defendants will all relevant evidence enabling a proper defense.

Criminal legal experts explain that unlike film-portrayed crime dramas, actual ones rarely include surprise evidence by any party during proceedings, especially anything introduced near their conclusion.

Britain accused Russia of poisoning Sergey Skripal, his daughter and police detective Nick Baileyyet refused to alleged reveal evidence corroborating its charges.

Accusations without evidence are groundless. No legitimate tribunal would accept them. The court of public opinion is another matter entirely – especially when manipulated by one-sided Russophobic finger-pointing.

Moscow justifiably demands release of all relevant information on the Skripal affair – nothing so far presented, indicating nothing incriminating Russia exists.

If otherwise, Britain would have revealed it straightaway to make its case.

Image result for Dmitry Peskov

Interviewed by RT, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov (image on the right) strongly denied Russian involvement in the Skripal incident. No evidence refutes him or other Russian officials.


“The first accusations came from politicians just a couple of hours after the accident…that ‘highly likely, Russia was responsible of that attempt of murder.’”

“And now we see the words of experts…from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) that say that the preliminary examination of this agent will take about three weeks. Is it contradictory? Yes, it is.”

Skripal is “of zero value…zero importance” to Russia, Peskov stressed.

Separately, Sergey Lavrov slammed Britain for breaching its legal obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention for refusing to provide Moscow with samples of the alleged toxin it claims, along with any other relevant information it has on the Skripal incident.

A statement by Russia’s embassy in Washington said:

“Our efforts to obtain facts on the incident from (Britain) have been in vain. They have been busy accusing Russia without proof of poisoning its citizens and attacking the UK, and feverishly seeking support from its partners without presenting any evidence.”

“We are convinced it is obvious that Russophobes in the hysteria-gripped West have been trying to hide their weakness behind ‘solidarity.’ “

The statement further criticized the Trump administration, blaming Russia for an incident it had nothing to do with.

Britain and Washington should present credible evidence of Kremlin culpability or apologize for their affront, the embassy stressed.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry Department for Nonproliferation & Arms Control director Vladimir Ermokov questioned the unlikely impartiality of the OPCW assessment of toxic samples provided by Britain, saying:

“(A) deeper, (independent) expert assessment (is) needed…for Russia to be able to come to any conclusions.”

The OPCW lost credibility by colluding with the West against Syria in investigating CW incidents.

It’s findings were “a total fake,” Ermakov stressed – notably for the sham Kahn Sheikhoun probe conducted off-site with toxic samples supplied by the anti-Assad al-Qaeda-connected White Helmets.

Clearly, Britain has plenty to conceal about the Skripal affair, nothing to reveal incriminating Russia.

Other Western nations are complicit by going along with the ruse, notably America – instead of forthrightly rejecting it.

A Final Comment

US-led Western nations are hostile Russian adversaries, not Kremlin partners as it persists in claiming. Nothing they say or pledge is credible.

Trusting them is self-defeating – expecting them to change foolhardy, after a century of evidence proving otherwise, punctuated by short-lived periods of improved relations.

Russia’s only sensible option is allying East with reliable partners, abandoning efforts to join the Western community of nations, seeking its transformation into vassalage to their domination, its sovereignty destroyed.


Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Featured image is from Euronews.

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]