Riumshyn’s defense appeals SBI closure of case into falsification of evidence that kept former 155th Brigade commander in pre-trial detention center for almost a year

Riumshyn defense challenges closure of evidence case

On Thursday, June 11, the Shevchenkivskyi Court of Kyiv considered a complaint by the defense against the State Bureau of Investigation’s closure of a case into the falsification of evidence that led to the former commander of the 155th Brigade, Colonel Dmytro Riumshyn, spending almost a year in a pre-trial detention center.

Riumshyn’s lawyer Andrii Yosypov told Censor.NET about this in a comment.

Letter prepared "retroactively"

Yosypov noted that the State Bureau of Investigation accuses Riumshyn of committing crimes under Articles 426 and 425 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In particular, he is accused of allegedly, in 2024, personally and without authorization adding to the lists of servicemen sent for training in France military personnel in respect of whom reservations had been raised.

"And in order to prove the subjective element of the crime, the State Bureau of Investigation would have had to state and prove the fact that Riumshyn was fully aware and definitely possessed information that this or that serviceman should not be sent for training in France, that he had, so to speak, a negative profile. And when we, as lawyers, at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation in this main criminal proceeding began raising this issue and saying that the materials of the criminal proceeding contained not a single piece of evidence, not a single document, not a single official confirmation that Riumshyn had been properly and lawfully informed that this or that serviceman should not be sent for training in France, a letter from the Military Counterintelligence Department of the Security Service of Ukraine appeared, allegedly dated September 19, 2024 and signed by Mr. Radchenko. The content of this letter is that military counterintelligence, which was checking servicemen to determine whether this or that serviceman could or could not be sent for training in France... In this letter, military counterintelligence provides a list, I believe, of thirty servicemen and allegedly tells the commander of the military unit at that time, Riumshyn, that these servicemen cannot be sent for training in France. This letter, as we later understood, was not received by the military unit, was not registered there, and so on," the lawyer said.

The SBI uses this document as key evidence for the prosecution against Riumshyn in the proceedings currently under consideration in the Oleksandrivskyi Court of the Zaporizhzhia region, where he is charged with the intentional inclusion of individuals, regarding whom there were reservations, into the lists for training abroad in France.

Riumshyn’s defense claims that this letter was fabricated "retroactively." In particular, the fact that the names of servicemen who had not yet been mobilized into the Armed Forces of Ukraine at the time the letter was created were included in it indicates possible forgery. The individuals in question were drafted into the Armed Forces of Ukraine only in October 2024.

"Based on this, it is clear that this letter is forged. It is absolutely clear that the names of these servicemen were in fact entered retroactively. The letter was prepared retroactively. Why was this done? So that the SBI, in the criminal proceeding in which it accuses Riumshyn of a number of crimes, could prove the subjective element of the crime," Riumshyn’s lawyer said.

Court ordered SBI to launch investigation

In view of this, the defense filed a statement with the SBI about the commission of a criminal offense under Part 2 of Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (official forgery).

"At first, the State Bureau of Investigation refused to enter the information and open a criminal proceeding based on this statement. But eventually we forced them to do it through a complaint to the Shevchenkivskyi Court, and the court obliged them to launch a pre-trial investigation and enter the information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations," Yosypov said.

After the information was entered, the defense filed a number of motions to conduct investigative procedural actions: to question employees of the SBU Military Counterintelligence Department, to question Riumshyn and recognize him as a victim, and to question servicemen of the military unit in which Riumshyn was serving at the time.

The defense also requested a number of examinations: a handwriting examination, an examination of the age of the document that would objectively confirm the actual time of its creation and registration, and a psychoneurological examination to determine the amount of non-pecuniary damage caused to Riumshyn.

According to Yosypov, all key motions by the defense were ignored.

In addition, Riumshyn has still not been recognized as a victim, despite the fact that the court had previously overturned a similar refusal by the investigator. By refusing to recognize him as a victim, allegedly due to the absence of damages caused to the former commander of the 155th Brigade, the investigation is restricting the procedural rights of both Riumshyn himself and his representatives, the lawyer noted

As Yosypov said, the SBI investigator limited himself only to questioning four employees of the SBU Military Counterintelligence Department, who are in fact potential suspects in this falsification.

Closure of case

After that, the SBI decided to close the criminal proceeding.

"Over time, the investigator closed this criminal proceeding on the grounds that, allegedly, based on the questioning of only four military counterintelligence officers, he reached the conclusion that there was no corpus delicti as such under Article 366. In his resolution, he justified his decision precisely by saying that this military counterintelligence letter is not an official document that creates legal consequences, which is also absurd in itself, since it was used precisely as evidence in a criminal proceeding. That is, in principle, it entails legal consequences a priori," the lawyer noted.

Today, on June 11, the court began considering the defense complaint against the SBI investigator’s closure of the criminal proceeding concerning the forged letter.

According to Yosypov, only he spoke at the court hearing as Riumshyn’s defense lawyer. The investigator’s statement and examination of evidence are to take place at the next court hearing, scheduled for July 13.

The situation in the 155th Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the case against its commander, Colonel Riumshyn

As a reminder, on 1 January 2025, Censor.NET editor-in-chief Yurii Butusov outlined a number of facts about the circumstances of the formation and functioning of the 155th mechanised brigade "Anna Kyivska", which entered the battle near Pokrovsk and suffered significant losses there.
According to him, the 155th Brigade faced a number of problems: 1,700 soldiers left the brigade without permission before the first battle, the brigade commander was fired immediately after the battle, and one of the brigade's leaders died of a heart attack.
Butusov conducted a lengthy investigation to find out what exactly led to the significant losses of brigade personnel and equipment and massive AWOL.
In October, the 155th Brigade left for training in France. 1924 servicemen were sent there, of whom only 51 had more than a year of military service experience, 459 had up to a year of experience, and the majority, 1414, had just enlisted and served for less than 2 months, about 150 were sent to France even without undergoing the BGMT. About 50 military brigades fled to France.
The editor-in-chief of Censor.NET also reports that the brigade was not provided with the necessary weapons. In particular, the brigade has not received a single drone from the state to carry out combat missions. Also, according to Butusov, there were no electronic warfare equipment. The brigade was supplied by volunteers. In addition, all the 120 mm mortar shells produced by the Ministry of Strategic Industries that were given to the brigade were defective.
On 2 January, it became known that the State Bureau of Investigation had launched an investigation into the massive AWOL in the 155th "Anna Kyivska" Brigade following media reports. In turn, the French Ministry of Defence did not comment on the information that the 155th "Anna Kyivska" Brigade, trained by the French Armed Forces, was the subject of an investigation in Ukraine.
Also in early January, the results of a meeting of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief's Staff regarding the 155th Brigade "Anna Kyivska" became known.
On 5 January, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Oleksandr Syrskyi, promised to increase the capabilities of the 155th Brigade and admitted that there were problems that needed to be addressed.
The editor-in-chief of Censor.NET, Yurii Butusov, said that the formation of new brigades without their support was a gross mistake that was costly for the country.
On 20 January 2025, the former commander of the 155th Brigade, Riumshyn, was detained by the SSU. And on 22 January, the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv imposed a bail of UAH 90 million on him.
On 6 February, the Kyiv Court of Appeal left Riumshyn in custody. The court refused to release him on bail, instead reducing the bail from UAH 90 million to UAH 50 million.
On 11 June, the court remanded Riumshyn in custody until 20 July and reduced his bail to UAH 27 million.
On 4 September, the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv reduced the bail for the former commander of the 155th Brigade, Dmytro Riumshyn, from UAH 22.7 million to UAH 14.9 million.
On 11 September, the court reduced the bail to 10 million hryvnias, leaving Riumshin in custody.
On 24 November, the bail was reduced to 8 million hryvnias.
On 10 December, the Novomykolaiv District Court of Zaporizhzhia region reduced the bail for former commander of the 155th Brigade Dmytro Riumshyn from 8 million to 908,000 hryvnias.
On Monday, April 6, 2026, a hearing was held in the Oleksandrivskyi Court of Zaporizhzhia, as a result of which the obligation not to leave his place of residence was revoked for Colonel Dmytro Riumshyn.