Andriy Parubiy, Maidan snipers’ Mastermind?

August 31, 2025

On the occasion of his assassination in Lviv the other day, I'll re-post my article about "reformed" neo-Nazi and Ukrainian power player Andriy Parubiy, published at Oriental Review on May 29, 2014 By Adam LARSON (USA) (via Web Archive - original links may not work, expired or disallowed - see there for archived links and embedded videos missing here).

Who was Maidan snipers’ mastermind?

The probe into the Maidan “snipers problem” – by the new Ukrainian government underwritten by it – continues. On May 13, the fascinating interim findings were partly revealed, at a press conference called by parliamentary investigation head Gennady Moskal. Bullet forensics exonerated the previously blamed Berkut security force. Something in the findings also placed the unidentified shooters somewhere – unspecified – among “the ranks of the protesters.” It could even have been the EuroMaidan militants, he admitted, but MP Moskal thought infiltrators from the government’s security service SBU made more sense.

He predicted decades of debate with no resolution, and a week later he announced that a number of key documents were destroyed, complicating the search. But whatever led the investigators to this apparently dead-end admission, it seemed like a break in the script that put the snipers in areas secured by the government of then-president Viktor Yanukovych. For those following the details, the May 13 revelation seemed like a bit of realism creeping in.

But then the current Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council – Andriy Parubiy – stepped forward, hinting at a divergent probe delving further into fantasy. His investigation blames Russia and Vladimir Putin for the snipers, even though it was Parubiy – not Putin – who was supposed to secure the “EuroMaidan” where, the evidence increasingly says, the problem snipers operated.

Sniper Commandant?

While he insists he’s not a fascist, Andriy Parubiy co-founded the Nazi-inspired Social National party, now Svoboda, in the 1990s. Outwardly, he went mainstream early on, and joined Yulia Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party, running security operations on the Maidan for the 2004 “Orange Revolution.”

In 2013-14’s more violent regime-change “protests,” he was given the same responsibility. As Euromaidan Commandant and head of the Self-Defense Committee, he was in charge of security for areas where the mob’s authority had overridden the government’s.

We now know (partly from MP Moskal) that – on the pivotal day of February 20, which will remain the main focus of this report – sniper shots first hit police forces, and came from buildings Parubiy controlled. Ukraine’s previous head of the Security Service (SBU) Alexander Yakimenko said so in March, after fleeing to Russia. When the Commandant proved unable to stop the sniping, which everyone claimed to be against, Yakimenko says he offered to send in a unit to help. He only needed a guarantee his men wouldn’t be shot by Parubiy’s, but he says that was denied. From all this, the SBU chief deduced the snipers were under Parubiy’s command and protection.

In truth, this failure to stop the killing could be due to malice, or incompetence, or some mix. Whatever the case, the resulting bloodshed was all but necessary for the Kiev Cabal to finally take over. And considering his eminent competence, they made Parubiy security chief for all of Ukraine as soon as they could.

Sniper Investigator?

Reports from early March, before the Yakimenko accusations, spoke of a parliamentary investigation Parubiy himself was selected to lead. The apparent conflict of interest may, or may not, be why MP Moskal now seems to be in charge of that.

But in a May 21 interview for Euractiv, Parubiy speaks of a probe that sounds different, a probe blaming Russian Special forces – Spetsnaz – for penetrating his security cordon. Asked about the snipers, with the note “you must have first-hand information,” he sidestepped his own direct knowledge and told Euractiv:

“Now that we are conducting investigations, we have found that 18 Spetsnaz, including snipers, were in Maidan. The investigation will reveal from which points they were shooting, but I can already say that they did everything they could to spill blood and provoke civil unrest.”

…

“We have a working hypothesis which would be confirmed or rejected by the investigation, that in the most difficult days they shot equally – at Berkut and at the Maidan activists. Their aim was to instigate a more violent civic unrest … that Russia could warm its hands at this fire.”

…

“We know that Russian snipers shot at both sides.”

As Washington’s Blog noted in March, “everyone agrees that the snipers were false flag terrorists sewing chaos and confusion. … they only disagree about who the responsible party is.” This is another example, and (as we’ll see) the worst theory yet. And just look at who is trying to feed it to us.

Master Thug

From February 18-20, security forces and civilians were, as Parubiy says, killed somewhat “equally” by these snipers to create “violent civic unrest.” But there was a telling pattern to how different parts of that were timed.

First, consider how ten unarmed policemen were shot dead the night of February 18th, forcing a decision to bring in armed security forces. That allowed later killings to be realistically blamed on them, as happened. (Were these the same provocateurs present a day and a half later, or a different shift?)

By the 20th, a force was assembled on the Maidan adequate to stomp the police out by noon and shoot the Berkut out of their nearest posts by 12:45. They even blocked the train bringing in the Army support, and readied to march up to the central government’s buildings and stomp whomever they wished. This force was under Parubiy’s leadership no later than his announcement early on the 21st that “all the leaders of the hundreds are declaring their consent to coordinated action, including the hundreds of the Right Sector … We’re in control of Kiev. We have seized control of the government quarter.”

It was only at that shift in power that Parubiy “Spetsnaz snipers” unleashed their main killing spree. On video and within bare minutes, they picked off at least 30 unarmed civilians sent in behind the Hotel Ukraine, to top off “Heaven’s Hundred.” That is, this un-ambiguous, unforgivable “Yanukovych crime” was delivered as soon as the natural punishment for it had been placed.

Commandant Parubiy, who oversaw the distribution and timing of much of that violence, couldn’t deny its pattern helped them, as he said to Euractiv, “oust Yanukovich.” That prompted the question:

Q: So you recognize that you ousted Yanukovich?

A: Yes. He ran away.

Q: But he ran away because he was afraid for his life?

A: Yes of course. After so many deaths and such national tension, he understood that if he didn’t run away, the personal consequences could be very bad. 

Under this plausible threat, the president fled. An 1:36 pm announcement from the Maidan ordered members of Parliament to meet at 3:00 to vote him out for good. They were given “a guarantee that the Parliament would not be stormed during the session.” The “hundreds” just snatched that option, but promised not to use it – unless maybe they were provoked by a wrong vote. In the end most of Parliament was willing to show up on the 22nd instead, and those agreed unanimously to impeach Yanukovych – and not be stomped. After all, Parubiy’s Maidan machine still controlled Kiev.

Confirming Yakimenko’s Charges

When he spoke on May 13, investigation head Gennady Moskal did not specify any sniper perches, just implied that they were behind the lines Parubiy was in charge of. By noon on the 20th, this had expanded to include at least the Maidan at large, the Trade Unions Hall (Maidan HQ), the Conservatory, and Hotel Ukraine. The October Palace and unknown other buildings fell into his hands just after noon.

Former SBU chief Yakimenko said in March the first shots “came from the Philharmonic Hall,” probably meaning the (musical) Conservatory. After that, “many have witnessed 20 people leaving the building” with their sniper gear in bags. These “split into two groups – 10 men each.” One of these “took a position at the Ukraine hotel,” right next-door, and “the Security Service lost track” of the other sniper team.

Add 2025: One recent posting of the video with 15+ mostly-masked men in irregular military garb seen leaving Hotel Ukraine with Parubiy standing by, mainly looking the other way as seen here at right. Asked by the press what they carried, the men said musical instruments, in a joking manner. Guy in the front was not on his way to kneel somewhere (rolled mat) and play, what, a couple of clarinets maybe? Below: dated graphic I made then for alleged and observed shooting directions. For a better view, see the later and evolving work of Prof. Ivan Katchanovsky and this post for some later additions of my own. 

Parubiy must know by now where the snipers were, but he doesn’t want to tell us yet. The probe “will reveal from which points they were shooting,” he promises.

Yakimenko said “no weapons could be brought to Maidan without Parubiy’s permission. Hand guns, rifles, scopes – he had to agree to all of that.”

In one report, Parubiy gave a rough count of those armed with handguns – about 100. But he said “those people are not ours, they are unorganized,” just like the snipers. “This is kind of a problem.” This when he also said “we created a headquarters in the Maidan and we will not tolerate any action without coordinating with it.”

As mentioned above, Yakimenko says he offered to help Parubiy flush out the gunmen, but was rebuffed. If true, that suggests either a criminal denial of his incompetence, or the commandant’s active approval of the killing.

The SBU chief has a 20-man sniper team in Parubiy’s turf. The man who would know might refer to the same group when he speaks of “18 Spetsnaz, including snipers.” Maybe 20 was a visual estimate, and the “Russians” split up into groups of nine?

One might expect Parubiy to be embarrassed that his own secured buildings were so infiltrated, but he puts the villains “in Maidan.” The original claims of February had the snipers in or on government-held buildings further southeast. Why can’t he just say that now? Why openly claim such a humiliating security breach unless the alternative is even worse?

Parubiy even claims he failed to stop the snipers on the way back out. After sneaking in and unleashing this mayhem, they walked away from the Maidan undetected, and “I think they escaped from Ukraine,” he told Euractiv.

But it was reported at the time that two snipers were caught by his teams, one at least in the Hotel Ukraine. At mid-day on the 20th, an official tweet said, “members of Maidan Self-Defense captured one of the snipers. He is currently in Maidan headquarters.”  But a different “Maidan commandant” – Stepan Kubiv – said he was just there and didn’t hear any such thing.  A message of the 21st said a “sniper was caught on the 10th floor of the Hotel Ukraina … Personality to be identified,” but it never was.  A later one heard that “maydan activists caught two snipers” total, but the source said nothing about their fate or identities.

If they were caught red-handed, why doesn’t Parubiy mention these snipers now? Did they even exist, outside these vague reports? Were they real, but managed to escape? Or did Parubiy order them released? The balance of reasons suggests the killers were under his command and protection, as Yakimenko said, and as the evidence always suggested.

Clearly Commandant Parubiy, of the February “Failures,” is not the best one to be speaking about the Maidan snipers. Expect the May interview to be his last word on that bloodshed.

Postscript: “Ensuring Peace and Safety”

In more promising areas, Andriy Parubiy remains the go-to guy. As the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, he’s now tasked with the brutal and confusing “anti–terrorist” operation in eastern Ukraine, and apparently in Odessa. This he wages with a “National Guard” that grew out of his murky Maidan machine, against those Ukrainians who dare to vote against the Kiev Cabal, pushing Ukraine deeper into civil war territory with violence he always blames on “Russian terrorists.”

Helping overturn two popular votes for Yanukovych, ensuring a third overthrow will never be needed, plus his new “security” work, has earned Parubiy friends in the “Democratic” West. He spoke to Euractiv while in Brussels, he said, “to participate in a session of the Ukraine-NATO working group” regarding the Russian “hybrid war” against Ukraine. As he explained it:

“When we speak about fighting terrorists, the best way is to find their centre of coordination, of financing. In this case, this centre is one person, it is Putin. That’s why I say – we have no crisis in Slavyansk, in Donetsk, in Luhansk. We have a crisis in Putin’s head. … if Putin succeeds in Ukraine, nobody can tell where his tanks will be tomorrow. … To stop Putin is not only Ukraine’s major goal. It should be the goal of the entire civilized world.”

In Parubiy’s dangerously unhinged thinking, even the massacre at the Trade Unions building in Odessa on May 2 “was a classic provocation in which pro-Russian groups had to seize the administration buildings in the same way it happened in Donetsk and Luhansk.” But this time, the anti-Putsch activists were clearly chased in, and followed in, by an ultra-nationalist lynch mob. He also contradicts himself by claiming the building was already “a kind of headquarters for the separatists,” where “the substance that provoked the blaze” was brought in by them “a long time ago.”

That’s why, he says, “when Molotov cocktails were thrown from the fourth floor at the participants of the Ukrainian rally, the substance inflamed” and an “explosion happened.”

Of course, on-site video and photos prove this was terrorism, and it seems the mob torched the building largely to hide their brutal murder of perhaps 272 citizens. That Parubiy was there to help coordinate it, after attending a top-level April 24 meeting to plan the Odessa “counter-terrorist” operation, makes it seem like state-sponsored terrorism.  A former deputy head of the Odessa police, now fled to Donetsk, blames Parubiy for personally organizing the massacre.  He was seen there on April 29th, delivering bulletproof vests to one Mykola Volkov – a criminal deputized as a “sotnik” (the term used for commanders of “hundreds” on the Maidan). Volkov was later seen shooting a pistol at the Trade Unions building, wearing a bulletproof vest, and phoning in a false story – possibly to Parubiy himself.

With Ukrainians all united but Moscow’s agents everywhere, the “security” chief told Euractiv, they needed an “overhaul” of “the entire security and defense sector,” and maybe civil society too, including “criminal groups” and “ethnic groups.”

The NATO allies had just heard the same and understood, promising “extensive support to the Ukrainian delegation” – including this false-flagging fascist thug – considering their “crucial role in ensuring peace and safety in Europe and the world.” Further, they “expressed readiness” to help in “reform” of the Parubiy’s defense and security sectors.

Events in Odessa, Maruipol, and elsewhere might have convinced the Cabal’s double-speaking Western allies that civil society “overhauls” are best left to Parubiy and his “Ukrainian rally” types.

Sergei Korotkikh and the Massacres at Bucha and Mariupol

File under No Nazis in Ukraine, Nazis in Russia, False-Flag

August 24, 2025

(rough, incomplete)

A Wayward Neo-Nazi Finds his Home

Sergei/Serhiy Korotkikh/Korotkykh (Сергій Коротких) aka Boatsman/Boatswain («Боцман») is a Belorussian neo-Nazi who operated in Russia, where, around 2002, as a Declassified UK investigation finds, "he founded a Russian neo-Nazi group – the National Socialist Society. It spread fear in Moscow by targeting darker-skinned guest workers from the Caucasus and central Asia. The group was banned and its members convicted of dozens of racist murders."

Continuing: "Korotkikh is alleged to have killed two migrants in 2007, beheading one of the victims – Shamil Odamanov – on camera beneath a swastika flag. He denies the allegations, which featured in the multi-award winning documentary Credit for Murder by Israeli director Vlady Antonevicz." [1] I have a screen-grab with no gore, but a swastika flag, proper Nazi-era style, stretched between two trees in the woods where they have the bound men kneeling. He can deny that was him under the mask, but he can hardly deny founding the xenophobic neo-Nazi group that took credit.

That documentary came out in 2015, but somehow, Korotkikh was never formally charged in Russia until 2021, reports Declassified UK. He had already fled or left Russia, moving to Ukraine around the time of the Maidan "revolution" in 2014, maybe understanding it was a good place for Nazis to be. As it so happens, he was warmly accepted by Ukraine's new government, granted citizenship in a public ceremony by president Poroshenko (pic), and given a position in the new Azov Battalion. [2] As explained below, he would command Azov's reconnaissance unit, operating from Mariupol, Ukraine's occupied capitol for the occupied parts of Donetsk oblast. 

Keep in mind that, as Declassified UK put it, Azov was "a neo-Nazi militia founded by Ukrainian far-right activist Andriy Biletsky to fight against pro-Russian separatists in the Donbas. Biletsky reportedly once said he wanted to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade…against Semite-led Untermenschen [subhumans].” [3]

For a guy who supposedly never committed those murders in Russia, Korotkikh has a way of knowing all about high-profile murders now in Ukraine. In 2021 he was talking about the mysterious death of Belarusian Vitaliy Shyshov in Ukraine." [4] Already in 2019 he was saying "the Poroshenko regime is hiding details of the investigation into high-profile murders." [5] 

After the Russian invasion of 2022, Korotkikh and his specialized skills were set to work defending the fatherland. He was pictured with a large cache of weapons to on February 26 (pic). [6] He also published a video where he vowed to play football with the severed heads of "Chechen" fighters. [7] Surely just a figure of speech? On March 22 he gave an interview about the far right in Ukraine and the Donbas conflict, 2014 vs. now, complaining about "certain restrictions on the use of combat skills" compared to the old days (we'll come back to that). [8] 

Korotkikh and the Bucha Massacre

A new unit he formed - "the Boatsman boys" - would be deployed in various places, including Bucha, the site of the supposed massacre by Russian forces. Perhaps Korotkikh's most famous moment came on April 2, a few days after the Russian withdrawal, when he posted a video from his boys in Bucha that included an apparent order to execute captured men. As The Gray Zone summarized, "A clip of the reported “clean-up operation” published by Sergey Korotkikh, a notorious neo-Nazi Azov member, shows one member of his unit asking another if he can shoot “guys without blue armbands,” referring to those without the marking worn by Ukrainian military forces. The militant stridently responds, “f*** yeah!”" [9]

Only burned out Russian tanks on Vokzalnaya street are actually shown, but the discussion comes through on the commander's radio as he films them. I note that he speaks so casually he could be ignoring the question and just commenting on the two tanks left in a sort of mating position. But I don't suppose that would hold any weight in, for example, a future war crimes trial.

There were claims Korotkikh was the man filming the scene, but he clarified that his men fighting in Bucha had sent him the video [10] while he was on a mission near the Belarus border (we'll come back to near-border stuff below). Many reported that the video was deleted, but it was there on Telegram when I checked (although it doesn't come up now). The text description included (translated) "BOATSMAN BOYS work in Bucha. Actually, there is nothing to do there." There may have been suspected collaborators to execute, as the audio suggests, but if so it's lumped in with everything else and rounded down to "nothing." [11]

Vox Ukraine published a supposed debunk of running claims, pointing to some video postings with extra sounds added. In the original, it says, "there are no loud shots-like sounds at the end of the recording ... At the end of the recording, you can clearly hear “please" but further words cannot be deciphered." [12] The version I heard then didn't feature anything like gunshots, and the voices weren't clear at all. So they're probably right that some versions were faked up. But the sources I cite here mention none of these added sounds, though others apparently did. Everyone agrees there's an audible "please" in the background, with indistinct voices most likely (from context) pleading for their lives, and no one denies there is an apparent request and approval for the execution of captured, presumably civilian men, who were probably shot, even if we don't hear that. A few exaggerations do not alter these facts. And keep in mind, that's just from this one short video, aside from whatever else happened off-camera. 

The Vox Ukraine article further notes "the bodies of the dead civilians were already lying on the streets when the Ukrainian military entered the city." [13] This is true, in contrast to lazy claims that Ukrainian forces were responsible for the presumed executions, citing how these bodies were not mentioned or seen in earlier views or reports filed from totally different streets. I had a deep look into Bucha and found it a very mixed bag, with the balance of blame left mostly unclear. The evidence shows most of the bodies later seen in videos were killed by Russian forces, especially in their 2nd invasion on March 5. Most seem to have died by tank fire in murky "traffic incidents" as opposed to executions. Many other bodies were reported to contain a type of shrapnel common in Ukrainian shells, while some bodies lay next to the impacts of artillery from the Ukrainian-held southeast. Other seen cases were murkier, and perhaps hundreds of reported deaths and their circumstances are left completely unseen. 

A group of 8 men were clearly taken prisoner by Russian forces, as seen on surveillance video, and marched to the spot they would later be seen, apparently executed. These were called civilians, then admitted to be 7 illegal, ununiformed fighters with Ukraine's new "Territorial Defense Forces" (TDF) and the civilian man found sheltering them in his house. Apparently, the legality of this move is actually debatable, but I for one don't support it. Another group of executed men found in a basement at a former Russian base, including one with a white armband, may have been executed there after the "liberation" (fresh-seeming blood, debatable rigor mortis clues), or before that as alleged, with mixed clues as to their allegiance. 3 other men that appeared executed seem to be more TDF fighters killed by a Russian shell from the north long before one of the bodies was staged as if executed - clean white cloth was used to tie his hands after rolling the body from an earlier position, seemingly held during at least one heavy rain). [14] 

So it's hard to say how much of the "Bucha massacre" was committed by Korotkikh's men or other "liberators," but it seems likely at least a few suspected collaborators were executed, especially given this casually publicized ADMISSION TO SUCH ORDERS. 

Korotkikh and the Mariupol Market Massacre

I recognized the name Sergei Korotkikh, more or less, from an earlier massacre in Ukraine. His face rang the same bell, but I had the name wrong (or was it given differently?) as Korotkov. This leads into my addition to the file: he already seemed like a mega-creep likely involved in a January 24, 2015 false-flag rocket attack in Mariupol I studied in some detail at the time.[15] 

Some 30 locals were killed and 100 injured when about 100 Grad rockets pelted the Vostochniy district in the span of 30 seconds (as reported). These were generally thought to be fired by separatist forces moving in on Mariupol, presumably on accident as they aimed for a Ukrainian military checkpoint on the district's northern outskirts. Either way, the allegations seem to have stalled separatist progress until the Minsk II accords froze the conflict, ending such moves on the city until the Russians came in 2022, leading to epic destruction and mass casualties amid circumstances few understand. [16]

This "Mariupol market attack" is where I first learned reliable ballistic analysis under varying conditions, analyzing dozens of geolocated impacts and, copying some unverified dots from someone else's map, set all the red dots on the map attached below. To my credit as no propagandist, while I wanted to show how Kyiv's forces did this, I read the ballistic evidence much like the OSCE observers did - the rockets came mainly from the rebel-held east and northeast, but also from the contested SE and perhaps south, where Ukraine had just taken control. In nearly all such cases I've studied since then, the fire comes from Ukrainian areas plain as day. But this case was different. 

Out of some 100 rocket impacts ostensibly aimed at the checkpoint (see map w/notes below), none came close to hitting that target. The closest one missed by some 500m and the furthest by about 2km. To achieve this terrible effect, 3+ firing directions had to make the relevant mistakes (various combinations of overshooting and targeting far to the left) with no mistake on the perfect synchronization. This is beyond unlikely and so this was probably no accident. 

But who would have the motive to do this on purpose? Separatists would have the locals' support in this ethnic Russian district, and would have no reason to terrorize them ahead of liberation, and no reason to do so from their own areas, in their own name, in front of the whole world. Ukraine's occupying forces, headed up by the anti-Russian neo-Nazis of the Azov Battalion, on the other hand ... they might see value in basically shooting some of their hostages, to do it from the enemy's area and in their name, to frame the liberators and complicate their advance, even threatening to shoot more hostages if they dare approach Mariupol again. That may be just what happened here. 

Experts on the scene suspected as much. A Voice of America report noted "in spite of the evidence, many [locals] continue to believe that the government was responsible, though they are too afraid to say so openly." [17] They understand the motive lies with Azov so clearly that we're forced to consider if they could be to blame after all. The fire came mainly from separatist areas, yes, but to achieve that, Kyiv's forces would only require 2-3 positions snuck in along a porous border and established behind enemy lines, as stealthy as needed until the moment of attack. Then they would be exposed for 30 seconds of coordinated firing before packing up quick and running back home before they could be caught. That's not really implausible at all, and I propose that's just what happened. 

Anyone paying enough attention might suspect this was no accident, but I noticed the smug certainty of one "Serhiy Korotkov" (as I took it down), who was then "The Azov Battalion's RECONNISSANCE UNIT COMMANDER," sent into Vostochniy on January 24 to document the damage. A short edit of his video report (now private - screen grab below) has the "Boatsman" explaining: "anybody can check for oneself that this is not an accidental hit. There is no Ukrainian military here, and never have been. In this area, as graffiti on some walls shows, some fans of the Russian World live. Those who want the Russian World - see, here you got it." Earlier in the video he reported from Kievskaya street; "what's noteworthy is that over here we have "Left Sector" (opponents of Kiev-allied fascist group Right Sector). The Communiaki (derogatory term for Communists) received what they wanted." He alternates between smiling with amusement, and trying somewhat not to. His argument here is that, in "the Russian world," they like to deliberately kill their own. Anti-Russian neo-Nazis likely Korotkikh love to see the "Communiaki" die, but they don't have to fire a shot as their enemies kill themselves out of some self-destructive and perhaps subhuman instinct. Who wouldn't be happy amid carnage like that?

It might matter that his job was head of reconnaissance, the group tasked not so much with investigating attack sites in the occupied capitol city as with things like ... SNEAKING BEHIND ENEMY LINES, which is where those rockets had just come from. His certainty it was a deliberate Russian-on-Russian attack, in itself, suggests that he might have overseen this deliberate attack on Russians. Shortly after the attack, the recon chief was gloating at the attack site and, as the only relevant expert into what happened, setting the blame for us. But where was he, or where were his men, shortly before and during the attack? 

A known Neo-Nazi organizer with a past of likely murder and even beheading - a potential genocidal terrorist in the wrong circumstances - was put in charge of this aspect of running Mariupol, Ukraine's eastern capitol city of hostages; he was likely allowed to commit a false-flag massacre of ethnic Russians in order to halt the separatist advance. It would then be little surprise if his men later sent to Bucha would execute some other locals seen as supporting "the Russian world" and to then blame the same "Russian world" for their slayings. And it would be no surprise if the claims were widely accepted by a sleepwalking global public.    

P.S. 4/25 And this likely committer of false-flag artillery massacres reportedly got 5 British rocket launchers for his adventures.  Phil Miller May 17 2023 https://x.com/pmillerinfo/status/1658768315014078464

I've been looking at where British rocket launchers for Ukraine have ended up. 

Five were obtained by Sergei Korotkikh, who founded Russia's National Socialist Society and is accused of beheading a migrant - he's been fighting for Ukraine since 2014.  

Sources:

[1] https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-russian-neo-nazi-leader-obtained-uk-missiles-in-ukraine/

[2, 3] ibid.

[4] https://twitter.com/HromadskeUA/status/1430232622773547016

[5] https://x.com/informator_news/status/1108415835528445953

[6] https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1497690688363900929

[7] https://twitter.com/Viaches50993743/status/1497453248021770242

[8] https://aspi.com.ua/news/kiiv/teroborona-kieva-mae-stati-pidrozdilom-zsu-komandir-batalonu-tro-korotkikh-foto-video#gsc.tab=0

[9] https://thegrayzone.com/2022/04/03/testimony-mariupol-hospital-ukrainian-deceptions-media-malpractice/

[10] https://meduza.io/amp/feature/2022/04/06/kak-ubivali-lyudey-v-buche

[11] Original posting:  Apr 2 at 13:33 = 11:33 PM in Ukraine https://t.me/botsmanua/16178

an active copy: https://x.com/antiwar_soldier/status/1511163378110287874

another: https://x.com/RWApodcast/status/1510635133627514881

[12] https://voxukraine.org/en/false-video-of-serhiy-korotkykh-boatsman-proves-that-ukrainian-military-killed-civilians-in-bucha/

[13] Ibid.

[14] details mostly in various blog posts of mine under this label - sorry, got lazy here https://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/search/label/Bucha%20Massacre

[15] some related links: https://twitter.com/CL4Syr/status/1510931185337180163

https://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2022/03/who-is-really-flattening-mariupol.html

https://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Mariupol_market_shelling

[16] https://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2022/03/who-is-really-flattening-mariupol.html

[17] http://www.voanews.com/content/ukrainian-authorities-struggle-to-secure-a-divided-mariupol/2668416.html

A Russian War on Ukrainian Civilians?

March 16, 2025

(rough, incomplete)

As a 2023 Human Right Watch report put it, "Russia unleashed a full-scale invasion, bringing death and suffering to millions of Ukrainian civilians" with its invasion of Ukraine the previous year. Since then, it says, "Russian forces have killed, raped, tortured, deported, or forcibly transferred civilians to Russia or Russian-occupied areas."  

In this article, we'll consider only the "killed" part, with an emphasis on civilians. I'm not as focused on injuries, important and terrible as they can be, but broadly speaking, the pattern I see (at least for civilians) is close to 2 injured for every fatality. So multiplying any deaths total by 3 should give you an idea of total casualties including wounded.

Following Russia's 2022 invasion, estimates of civilian deaths very widely between 12,600 (verified minimum from a recent OHCHR report) and, by tallying regional totals from Wikipedia, between 20,000 and 35,000, with Mariupol being the biggest variable (estimates there range from 10-20,000 in most sources, with over 25,000 killed per this list, citing other credible media reports).

Military losses, estimates, per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War 

Ukrainian Forces: 60,000-120,000 killed

Russian forces: 167,000-234,700 killed. 

Peoples' Republics forces (Russian-supported separatists): 21,000-23,500

Total military deaths since 2022: 260,000-413,200

So comparing 12.6k-35k civilians to the above, we get a death ratio somewhere between 0.03 civilians for each militant (0.03:1 or 3:100) to 0.14 civilians per (0.14:1 / 14/100). As we'll see, either number is remarkably low by world standards. 

Now let's consider the war's first phase, before Russia undeniably entered the field, the 2014-2019 "Anti-Terror Operation" in the Donbas and the 2015-2021"ceasefires" period following the Mink Accords (note the years of crossover) 

Estimated total killed: 14,000-14,300 

- 6,500 fighters of the Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples' Republics 

- 4,400 Ukrainian fighters, 

- 3,100-3,400 civilians 

(3100-3400) civilian deaths vs. 10,900 military ones = 0.3 civilians for each militant. That's 2-10x as bad as during Russia's invasion. And as I'll explain below, that's probably >80% killed by Ukraine.

Some prior estimates of civ:mil death ratios in select conflicts, all of them outside Europe, suggests a global double-standard (citing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio):

US -> Korea 3:1

US -> Vietnam 2:1

US -> Iraq: 3:1 down to 0.5:1 (counts vary widely)

US -> Afghanistan: 0.4:1 (may be higher) 

Israel -> Lebanon 1982: 4:1 or even 6:1

Gaza 2023-now: Probably at least 4:1 (counts vary widely)

Even Ukraine's brutal attacks on the Donbas (see below) yield a better rate than any of these, at 0.3 civilians for each militant, with the separatist side causing some of the deaths. Russia's invasion and Ukraine's response cuts the civilian deaths in half, to 0.14:1 or even lower.  And even of this small number, Ukraine contributes much of it - and probably most of it, directly with ongoing shelling of the Donbass, and indirectly as in occupied Mariupol. 

As I see it from middling study (on average - high in spots, low in others), there are 5 sets of circumstances allowing for some Ukrainian hand in killing civilians, even or especially where the Russians had invaded and were doing their own killing: 

1) Russian-occupied Donbass, Crimea, etc.: ethnic Russian in Russian-occupied lands killed in Ukrainian shelling, bombing & missile attacks. See below for some highlights of the first 8 months of the "Anti-Terror Operation" in 2014. This eventually mellowed, but the same kind of scale returned in 2022. 

2) Ukraine-occupied Donbass (occupied ethnic Russians, expendable in some minds = human shields, especially when the Russians are close to liberating an area) - est. 2,958 killed since 2022 in Donetsk oblast, both sides included, but excluding Mariupol and Volnovakha (Ukrainian occupied)

3) Mariupol (same as above but in a major, coastal, strategic city that served as the capitol of occupied Donetsk - Mariupol wound up flattened and massacred as a severe example - an area I studied in some detail: https://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2022/03/who-is-really-flattening-mariupol.html and should revisit, considering it may account for 10,000 to 25,000 or around 50-70% of all civilian deaths. Mainly, Ukraine weaponized the city to kill Russians, firing from every building, getting them wrecked in response, with little or even negative regard to civilian harm. My research suggests the Azov Brigade, not the Russians, blew up the drama theater on March 16, killing perhaps just a few dozen people they chose not to evacuate, for their own murky reasons, rather than the 1,200 widely reported. The very high counts might include this bigger number and might thus inflate the death toll there. Monitor on Massacre Marketing: Mariupol Theater Bombing, 3/16/2022

4) Bucha circumstances / parts of Kyiv Oblast were the 2nd deadliest after Donetsk, 1,569 civilians killed - occupied by Russia but partly sympathetic - massive violence used, killing innocents with heavy shelling, with likely execution of suspected collaborators after liberation -Many posts here: https://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/search/label/Bucha%20Massacre - ignore all purple-shaded maps - another important issue to revisit. It was a mixed bag, with some definite Russian crimes, like executing 7 captive TDF fighters and the man sheltering them, and other brutality, if it often seems accidental.

5 The rest that was briefly occupied by Russia but I know less about (maybe like Bucha but varied, usually less severe?)

In Kyiv, there were only some 200 deaths total, probably most of these from missiles Ukraine shot down over the city to prevent another hit to their soldiers. This isn't a major factor, and it applies on the other side as well. One of the deadliest attack on Donetsk, on March 14, 2022, saw 23 civilians killed in a single, unusual attack with a Tochka-U missile and cluster bomblets, after it was shot down by DPR forces right over downtown, complicating the blame for what happened.

More Deaths on the Russian Side

"On 17 February 2023, the Ukrainian prosecutor general announced that at least 461 children had been killed since the start of the invasion, with a further 923 wounded.[153] Most of these child victims were from the Donetsk region.[153]"

"Russia does not allow monitoring in territories it controls, where civilian deaths are thought to be highest." 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

May 28, 2024: 282 children have been killed and 733 injured, just in the DPR, over the full 10 years of the conflict. It would be higher if many of children and young mothers had not been moved further back or even to Russia for their safety. (TASS)

Most civilian casualties - 85-90% - between 2014 and 2016 were from "indiscriminate shelling of residential areas," an OHCHR report found, but this is not broken down into deaths on each side.  

From 2017-2020 OSCE found 2.4 shelling casualties (injured or killed) in the PRs for every one on the other side. (657 vs.270). Just Donetsk: 513 vs. 223. Just Lugansk: 144 vs. 47. (OSCE report) From 2018-2021 A UN study found FIVE shelling casualties in the PRs for each one on the other side. (310 vs. 62). (UN report) There's an argument that the OSCE routinely undercounted attacks and casualties, especially in the PRs, to the tune of about half of them missed. (Donbass Insider) That's supported by the above (2.4 vs. 5), and the UN numbers are preferrable. This means, barring false-flags and ignoring short-shot misfires by either side, Ukrainian forces killed 5 times as many civilians as the other side did.

Amnesty International, November 6, 2014

"The large majority of the [civilian] deaths were in separatist-held territory in Donetsk, and were likely caused by Ukrainian government forces, but separatist forces appeared responsible for several deaths in Avdiivka and Debaltseve, areas under government control. The organization’s research strongly suggests that separatist forces fired from these neighbourhoods, and Ukrainian government forces fired into them. In at least one instance, government forces placed an artillery position in a residential area." 

Separatist weapon placement in residential areas was "strongly suggest[ed]" while Ukraine's was apparently proven and stated as a fact. And yet, there were few civilian casualties on the Ukrainian side, and far heavier ones on the other side. The Ukrainians kill so many civilians, it doesn't seem they even aimed for military targets to begin with. It could be all the talk of indiscriminate weapons with poor aim misses the main point that these hits were probably no accident, but rather intentional state-sponsored terrorism.

Otherwise, the record is least clear in 2014, when it was likely higher rate of deaths in the PRs than in later years, applied to a much higher death toll. Probably at least 6:1 on around 1,786 civilian deaths = at least 1,531 civilians killed by Ukraine vs. at most 255 by the Peoples' Republics, from April to December. Civilian deaths per year:

2014: 2,084 (1,786 + 298 on MH17)

2015: 955

2016: 112

2017: 117

2018-2021: 58, 27, 26, and 25, at the end mostly from unexploded ordinances. (UN report)  especially in 2021 as the ceasefires was mainly held to, as it turns out, while Ukraine prepared to violate the Minsk accords with a publicly threatened reconquest of Crimea (March, 2021) and subsequent force buildup in the Donbas and then shelling of civilian homes and infrastructure, starting in November 21 and accelerating in January and February, before Russian forces finally entered the war for real, 8 years into it. (see here)

2014 Disputed Attacks (a few examples)

So 2014 is the big question regarding civilian casualties prior to Russia's invasion. Both sides blamed each other for everything that happened, and it was a lot. I can help us get some idea which side was lying. 

June and July: Deadly Airstrikes 

For the most part, the attacks used artillery shells, rockets and missiles fired from the ground. I often call all of this "shelling," and I think that's technically correct. But at first, Ukraine was more bold and used fighter jets only they had to attack civilian targets on the ground. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

On 2 June, eight people were killed and more than 20 wounded by a series of explosions hitting the occupied RSA building in Luhansk city.[185] Separatists blamed the incident on a government airstrike, while Ukrainian officials denied this, and claimed that the explosions were caused by a stray surface-to-air missile fired by insurgents.[186] The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) published a report on the next day, stating that based on "limited observation", they believed that the explosion was caused by an airstrike, supporting separatist claims.[187]

A CNN investigation found clear evidence that the attack came from the air and the pattern of the craters suggested use of standard equipment on the Su-25, a ground-attack fighter, and the Su-27 – both combat aircraft operated by Ukraine.[185] Radio Liberty also concluded that "Despite Denials, All Evidence For Deadly Explosion Points To Kyiv".[188] CNN said that it was the first time that civilians had been killed in an attack by the Ukrainian air force during the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in the Donbas.[185] The next day, Luhansk People's Republic declared a three-day mourning in the city.[189]

More here at the ACLOS wiki I helped start. Note that one of those killed, here at the government's HQ, was the LPR's Minister of Agriculture, killed along with another woman she was talking with outside the building. One of the women (I'm not sure which) was seen alive in a terrifying aftermath video, her lower body shredded, pleading for someone to help find her phone so she could call someone.

A month later: BBC July 15 "Rockets struck the town of Snizhne in Donetsk region around 07:00 (04:00 GMT), hitting a block of flats and a tax office. The rebels blamed the attack on Ukraine's air force - a claim denied by Ukrainian sources. ... Ukrainian officials said 11 people had been killed and eight injured, including a child. Earlier, they had put the toll at four while rebels spoke of around 10 civilians being killed." When Ukraine denies and downplays at the same time, it's troubling. 

The BBC report shared a video of the apartment building with entire floors in the middle reduced to rubble - rescuers dig through it by hand for survivors. Why would Kyiv do this? No one seemed to care much or for long. 

It was in this same town of Snizhne, just two days later, that separatists supposedly smuggled in a Russian BUK air defense system, as if to prevent another such attack there. By the video record, it was stationed in the fields south of town (ACLOS), from which it purportedly shot down Malaysian Airlines flight MH-17 that same afternoon, killing 298. Interpretations of this incident vary widely, and I have complex thoughts but no firm theory, and also barely followed case developments since 2014. But the basic suggestion I see as likely enough is that the separatists made a terrible mistake as they tried to defend themselves from Ukraine's denied terrorism. But it just sharpened what "terrorists" Ukraine was up against At right: President Poroshenko, July 21: the whole world is either "with the terrorists" or "with the civilized world." And does he even need to specify which is which? Just days after MH-17, no. 

July Grad Rocket Attacks in Donetsk

HRW report, July 24, 2014

Just focusing on attacks with grad rockets, HRW reported 13 people, including 2 children, were killed in two attacks on July 12, and another 3 were killed in an attack on the 21st, with 2 non-fatal attacks in between. 

"Although Ukrainian government officials and the press service of the National Guard have denied using Grad rockets in Donetsk, a Human Rights Watch investigation on the ground strongly indicates that Ukrainian government forces were responsible for the attacks that occurred between July 12 and 21."

The four attacks took place close to the front line ... In all four cases, the angle and shape of the craters, and the fact that they were on the side of buildings facing the front line, strongly suggests that the rockets came from the direction of Ukrainian government forces or pro-Kiev armed groups.

The direction isn't specified, but most likely northwest. That's usually the case. Here's an apartment building with at least 2 apartments seemingly hit with 2 shells (no details past Donetsk, 2014 - from a video) - high sun suggests midday in summer, so the impacted side faces at least partly to the north. (A video compilation of building damage from 2014 shelling, on RUTUBE)

 

Starting in August, missiles fired on Donetsk in large numbers scattered cluster munitions far and wide, killing and injuring then and into the future. But we'll discuss this below with HRW analysis including further attacks in October. 

On September 5, a ceasefire was agreed. According to DPR officials, the ceasefire was violated by Ukraine many times, ten times in just one day, September 20, damaging homes and killing 4 civilians in the Peoples' Republics. (Sputnik Globe)

October 1 Rocket Attacks on School & City Bus 

On October 1, the ceasefire was broken again with 10 killed in Donetsk, 4 at school on the first day of classes. and 6 in another hit on a city bus.

France 24: "A source in Donetsk city hall told AFP that the strike happened right after the school's 70 pupils lined up for an assembly to mark the first day of class -- held nationally on September 1 but pushed back by rebel authorities because of the conflict."

"The children were taken to the basement; they are still there," the source said.

The pro-Kiev regional government of Donetsk, which is now based in the government-controlled city of Mariupol, accused pro-Russian separatists of the self-declared "Donetsk People's Republic" of shelling the school.

"The Donetsk People's Republic used rocket launchers to shoot at a school... the shell exploded five metres away from the building," the regional administration said in a statement.

Six more people died when another shell struck a public minibus in Donetsk, the regional authorities said, making Wednesday's casualty figures the highest civilian death toll in a single day since a ceasefire was struck.

As it happens, I already checked this one, a couple years go, mainly the bus but also the school impact. The pro-Kyiv crowd cited the bus attack as evidence the separatists were to blame, for this if not everything. Reason: the rocket was fired from the southwest, not the northwest as usual. "For those not from #Donetsk: the projectile on Poligraficheskaya, which killed 8 people, came from the side of the city, not the airport (see diagram)." At least 2 others did their own analysis to similar effect - origin to the southwest. Tacit acknowledgement: other attacks HAVE come from the airport direction (NW).

I checked and the readings are correct enough, for the bus and the school. The bus rocket tube points SW, which most read as the direction. It might be, but these can bend on the final stop, just after the detonation, as this one might have. The splash pattern of fragmentation marks on the pavement is the best indicator. It's not totally visible, but the shape to me suggests an origin closer to due south. My red line below runs due south, which may be too literal. It could be a bit either way, more likely SW, or anywhere in the range marked by white lines. Lower right shows the approximate front line at the time. 

The school damage wasn't as clear or easy to read, but especially so close to the damaged south facade, that shell to seemingly came from the south in almost the same way, but with less indication of SW, more likely due south (see post for details).

Smerch rockets used - If that means BM-30 (Wikipedia), it can fire different rockets with different ranges up to 100 and even 200km, and other models with shorter ranges, so it's hard for me to say. The front line is less than 20km to the SW, down to a Ukrainian-held are to the due south about 35-40km out and spanning to 60 km. 20-40km is needed, depending. so that could be a long-range, pretty normal or maybe even short-range use, depending on the exact rocket used. 

"DPR deputy leader Andrei Purgin told Russian TV that Ukrainian rocket launchers had targeted residential areas from as far as 40km (25 miles) away." (BBC) It could be from the edge of that area about 40km due south. It could also be a closer attack from a more SW direction, or any distance after sneaking east behind enemy lines is entirely possible. And the DPR doing it is entirely possible. So this case is inconclusive, and it's the top example to suggest DPR/Russian false-flag terrorism in the first year (I found 3 people on Twitter pushing this one, no one pushing any others, at least in English). 

But as I showed, a south or southwest angle is also not nearly as conclusive as these people made it seem. In fact, the next day, Human Rights Watch would use the same basic angle to prove it was Ukraine shelling Donetsk, now with cluster munitions.

August-October Cluster Munitions on Donetsk

August to October: cluster munitions fired on Donetsk and other towns, both before and after the September ceasefire. Human Rights Watch, October 20, 2014:

"Ukrainian government forces used cluster munitions in populated areas in Donetsk city in early October 2014, Human Rights Watch said today. The use of cluster munitions in populated areas violates the laws of war due to the indiscriminate nature of the weapon and may amount to war crimes."

In the 12 incidents documented by Human Rights Watch, cluster munitions killed at least 6 people and injured dozens." There were others they didn't investigate. Their analysis found "the cluster munitions came from the direction of government-controlled areas southwest of Donetsk." 

"The government of Ukraine has neither confirmed nor denied using cluster munitions in eastern Ukraine. It has not responded to a letter sent by the Cluster Munition Coalition in July or a letter sent by Human Rights Watch on October 13."

On October 2, 3 rockets were used on areas southwest of Universitetskaya street in central Donetsk, each one scattering submunitions over a wide area. One of the rockets hit at a supermarket that had a Red Cross center attached. "Thirty-eight-year-old Laurent DuPasquier, a Swiss employee with the International Committee of the Red Cross ... was killed during the attack in which cluster munition rockets were used." "Also on October 2, submunitions from another Uragan cluster munition rocket struck the building of the Mountain Rescue Service, at 157 Artem street in Donetsk." Red Cross and rescue people were targeted. 

"Submunition impact craters close to buildings in the three sites make it unlikely that the cluster munition came from the west, north, or east. The large crater in the second location indicated that the rocket had come from the southwest. This is the only direction consistent with all the impact craters, and therefore points to use by Ukrainian forces."

Then on October 5, "at least two Uragan cluster munition rockets struck the fifth subdistrict of the Kyivskyi district in central Donetsk.  ... A video of a rocket remnant lodged in the ground near 22 Kosiora street indicates that the cluster munitions were fired from the southwest. Supporting this finding, a local resident in Novomykhailivka, southwest of Donetsk, told a New York Times journalist that he had seen rockets launched from a position south of village in the morning of October 5."

In Makiivka, just east of Donetsk, HRW heard that "cluster munitions had killed two people on August 19 and 20 near a train station" while "a second cluster munition attack took place near a rebel checkpoint northeast of the town, suggesting a government attack." There was a third attack as well, but no directions are given for any of them. 

Starobesheve, southeast of Donetsk, was contested on August 24, with separatists in control of some areas and soon the whole town, when cluster munitions struck near the local administration building, killing 3 civilians and injuring 17. 

"The rocket tail section stuck in the ground in front of the local administration building shows that the rocket came from the southeast. With a maximum range of 70 kilometers and the Ukraine-Russia border 30 kilometers away, the cluster munitions could have been fired from Ukrainian territory southeast of Starobesheve, which was controlled by Ukrainian government forces at the time, or from Russian territory. The press center for the Ukrainian authorities’ counterterrorist operation claimed at the time that the cluster munitions had been fired from Russian territory. Human Rights Watch was not able to conclusively attribute responsibility for this attack."

Well, what does the reader think? 

November 5 Attack on Kids Playing Football

BBC November 5 "Two teenagers died and four were wounded when an artillery shell hit a school playing field as they played football in eastern Ukraine." A report of the OSCE special monitoring mission (SMM) heard  It was at 3:30 pm that 2 artillery shells impacted at School No. 63 on Stepanenko Street in Donetsk, with one hitting the football field.  A witness heard eight explosions. "According to him the first two occurred in quick succession. The other six occurred within five minutes of the first." "2 shells hit where children were playing at School No. 63 on Stepanenko Street, Donetsk," probably the first 2 quick hits. "The SMM saw human remains scattered around the pitch, including bone fragments, blood and internal organs. Blood-stained clothing was also visible, which appeared to have been torn by shrapnel."

Amnesty International declared: “Today’s shocking attack in Donetsk must by fully investigated. If it is found to constitute a war crime, those responsible must be brought to justice.”

Pro-Kyiv UNIAN would argue "Shell that hit school in Donetsk ‘fired from militant-controlled Makiivka’" Someone named Perebyinis (app. Yevhen Perebyinis, Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine) is cited saying "The shell that hit the school and killed [those] children in Donetsk was fired from territory controlled by the terrorists. We have photo evidence of it," he tweeted. "Perebyinis posted photos that he said proved that the militants were to blame for shelling the school. According to these photos, the shelling was carried out by insurgents from the occupied town of Makiivka, which is located to the east of Donetsk." 

No photos are shown, just a satellite view with a red line pointing almost due east, and a wider map showing a range of possible directions from the east. "The red line on the Google map shown above indicates the shell trajectory, as calculated by analysts at the ukraine@war blog." (site apparently defunct now) A video explaining the point was attached, but is no longer present. 

Update: found the tweet and linked page "Rocket that hit School No63 did not come from Peski." He doesn't seem to know what he's doing. "It is clear that the shell bent the fence and not the explosion, because the right part of the fence is not bent at all where the explosion hit." No, that's because this is the back direction where the force is directed down into the ground rather than up into the fence. (see below) 

I found some photos of the field impact and tried my own best reading: impact near NW corner, right at the north fence, blasting a narrow, deep crater there, tearing the fence up to the east (and up = forward), with curling inward = force from the west, near parallel with fence but a bit from the outside (north) - scorching from the ignition fireball spreads east (= forward on trajectory) - low frag marks appear a ways back, stop on a line running SW, and behind that the turf peels back with even lower force (and low = back). All this says arrival from northwest, not the east. I use the orange arc differently here, to include the low marks on the side and scorching ahead, as the splash pattern behind seems interrupted by the concrete and fence pole, winds up peeling turf instead. It is a bit hard to read, perhaps giving Perebyinis some excuse to read it almost backwards. 

(photos: https://tass.com/russia/758729 - https://ria.ru/20141106/1031957968.html - Google image search

Ukraine@War reading, upper left - my reading right - both mapped - I don't know the range, or length of the white line, just the direction. It could be from Pisky, further out, or closer in, but very little space for any DPR false-flag, and nothing but the flawed east origin was ever said to suggest that. Pisky or Peski is exactly where Perebyinis said the shell did NOT come from, so I suppose that's just where it came from, roughly.

The observers of the supposedly neutral but seemingly Ukraine-biased OSCE had to contradict Kyiv here, probably due to the evidence rather than any pro-Russian bias. Report

"The SMM also noted a crater in the playground, near the eastern wall" besides "three craters near a damaged apartment building," and "three other craters on nearby Myrhorodska Street. The SMM observed damage to a number of houses near these craters."

"All craters seen by the SMM were about one metre in diameter and the depths varied. The SMM’s analysis indicates that at least four of the craters were caused by 120mm mortar shells and two others were the result of 122mm artillery rounds." Probably the 2 bigger shells were used to kill the kids playing soccer. 

"In the SMM’s assessment, all of these were fired from a location north-west of the football pitch and were the result of high-angle fire." High angle, I think, means relatively short range. That would make for an extra vertical impact, which I think fits the damage. 

"At 09:25, the shelling obliged the SMM to leave the area. The SMM heard loud explosions about two kilometres away to the south-west."

Conclusion

A November 14 speech by President Poroshenko might have referred to these repeated school attacks when he assured people in Odessa they took the right path in rejecting the "terrorism." because "Our children will go to kindergartens and schools, theirs will be sitting in cellars. [bomb shelters] Because they can't do anything! That’s how we are going to win this war." When their whole lives are disrupted Ukraine wins. Suffering is the goal? Or is it when the "terrorists" finally die or flee to Russia, leaving the land to Ukraine? It also helps to win that they don't have to take credit for imposing this life on their enemies; according to the post-2014 weapon-state of Ukraine, the kids in Donbas were hiding exclusively from Russian or separatist fire, as a civilized state like Ukrainian would never do such a thing as target innocent civilians, even if they were "Russian terrorists." 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUp-sh1oaOU

How SITU Twisted the Maidan Sniper Massacre

March 20, 2023

Last edits March 24 - some updates re:Dmytriv in progress

Intro to Sniper Questions

Ukraine became such a great democracy to defend from Russia only in early 2014, after a "Revolution of Dignity." The pinnacle of this was when the previous government of Viktor Yanukovych was removed over accusations of mass murder. His security forces allegedly fired on the people around the central Maidan square in several episodes, killing over 100 protesters - the "Heavenly Hundred" - and a reported 18 police officers. The bulk of the protesters were killed the morning of February 20, reportedly by police snipers on the ground, who were seen firing their weapons. But there were widespread reports of mysterious shooters playing a part, from the surrounding buildings that had come under control of the protesters and organized street thugs and their allies like Svoboda, Right Sector, and assorted, murkier foreign agents. 

This massacre was an immediate reason early elections were called as President Yanukovych was denounced, sanctioned, and swiftly chased from the country - reportedly after assassination attempts. It's part of why his party of Regions had its headquarters torched on Feb. 20, by an armed mob (who reportedly beat an IT worker there to death). It's part of why the Regions party was soon illegalized, along with the Communist party, and a slew of opposition parties since. It allowed a bold new program in Ukraine, dedicated to fighting "Russian domination" and "corruption," while embracing "Democratic, European values" and striving towards "Euro-Atlantic integration." As a guiding spirit, they chose anti-Russian national hero and Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera.

That snipers episode was far from the only factor in this, but it was at the time crucial in shaping opinions, especially abroad, to favor this transition. It's a big part of why separatists in Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, and elsewhere were seen either as a Russian hoax or as "terrorists" with no right to reject thew new program, It's a big part of why Ukraine's new government was blessed and armed to wage civil war on the separatists, and why Russia wasn't allowed to intervene to defend them. It's part of why Ukraine is now worth risking global nuclear war over. 

And this geopolitically useful outcome is why we're led to turn a blind eye to the snipers massacre underpinning it, to unquestioningly accept the new government's creation myth. 

But questions were raised at the time, from many quarters, and many questions have been answered since. Professor Ivan Katchanovski, a renowned scholar of Ukrainian affairs, is one who has followed closely. A political scientist at the University of Ottawa, Prof. Katchanovski "had marshaled overwhelming evidence to conclude Maidan protesters were killed by pro-coup snipers," as The Grayzone recently noted. This work was encapsulated in "a peer-reviewed paper initially approved and praised by a prestigious academic journal" until it was "suddenly rescinded without explanation," likely under political pressure. 

That seems to be an updated, 2022 version of this 2021 report: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356691143_The_Maidan_Massacre_in_Ukraine_Revelations_from_Trials_and_Investigation/link/61a90e3f29948f41dbbc300f/download For general reference, see that report and these 2 useful videos: Video Appendix H - How Maidan Protesters Were Shot from Maidan-Controlled Buildings (2020) - The "Snipers' Massacre" on the Maidan in Ukraine (2021) - YouTube. From the latter video:

My focus here is on a bit of work from a few years back, but which I first learned of recently in that report: 

A New York architecture company working with a team of Ukrainian “volunteers” did a 3D model reconstruction of the killings of three Maidan protesters on an order of Maidan victims lawyers for the Maidan massacre trial.53 This SITU model was cited by these lawyers and the Prosecutor General of Ukraine under Poroshenko as definite evidence that the Maidan protesters were massacred by the Berkut police and that snipers did not massacre the protesters.

The project in question was by SITU, and still viewable at: http://maidan.situplatform.com/ 

An explanatory article from 2018 gives collaborators: Ukrainian legal team including attorneys Pavel Dykan and Alexandra Iatsenko with the Advocacy Advisory Panel, Center for Human Rights Science (CHRS) at Carnegie Mellon University, Jus Talionis Reconstruction Lab. "This project is part of SITU’s Spatial Practice as Evidence and Advocacy (SPEA) project, which seeks to utilize spatial analysis and visualization in the service of human rights fact-finding and reporting. ... The interactive platform and co-developed tool for the analysis of citizen video will have significant impact on court proceedings. It will mark the first time that visual evidence and analysis of its kind will be presented in Ukrainian courts." 

Finally: "The work of SPEA is funded by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Oak Foundation and the Open Society Foundations." No surprise there. 

And see who else loves this project: Who Killed the Kiev Protesters? A 3-D Model Holds the Clues - The New York Times (nytimes.com) June 3, 2018. The Times article poses the "claims of grief-stricken activists" - that their fellows were killed by Berkut police - against "denials from Yanukovych" and "Pro-Russia sources." The latter sources tied the snipers to "a U.S.-backed plot" for regime change in "a “false flag” operation carried out by snipers associated with the protesters, or mercenaries from the country of Georgia, who were said to have shot down from nearby buildings. To this day, the story continues to circulate on Kremlin-funded media like Sputnik and RT." And to this day, the claim continues to be reflected in the direct, physical evidence, as related by Professor Katchanovski, for one. From there, it's paywalled for me. But apparently, this scientific modeling proved the Russians totally wrong. (more sources below)

I appreciate the hard work, by SITU and its partners, that went into cataloguing the videos and modeling the area, parsing the medical reports and putting it all together. But this doesn't give them the right to distort the evidence like they do, modeling it wrong, over and over, to the same politically useful effect. 

Prof. Katchanovski authored a Critical response: The Buried Maidan Massacre and Its Misrepresentation by the West (consortiumnews.com) (April 22, 2019) - cited below. He also revisited the issue in the 2021 report: 

However, the wound locations of the three killed Maidan protesters in the 3D model do not match the wound locations in the forensic medical examinations of the bodies and clothes and locations of appearing bullet holes in shields and a helmet of these protesters right after they were shot. 

...[example, cited below]

42       The locations and directions of the wounds of these three protesters in forensic medical examinations and matching bullet holes that appeared in the shields of two of them and a helmet another along with their positions at the times of their killings point to their shooting from the top part of the Bank Arkada in the Maidan-controlled area. Several Maidan protesters and medics pointed to snipers there shortly before and after these three protesters were killed. (Video Appendix H). 

Other shootings have always seemed to come from the Hotel Ukraine, or the October Palace, or a few other buildings, as each came under control of militant "protesters" and the associated "EuroMaidan Self-Defense units." I called Arcade Bank early on based just on video analysis (video) and slim reports (see map at bottom of this article). But I barely followed after 2014 and never saw that it was confirmed by much evidence. 

"These three protesters," were probably shot "from the top part of the Bank Arkada in the Maidan-controlled area." By my own review of the available evidence, I'd say one of the 3 probably was shot from Arcade Bank. Another could well be, and the other is possible, but both of these others fit best with shots from one or another of a few building ahead that, as far as I know, no one has discussed. 

Why These Three Victims?

These three cases were selected, perhaps, because the "activists" thought these were the best chances at circumventing the Maidan snipers problem. Shooters from Hotel Ukraine and October Palace were well-known issues, while other suspect buildings were less known. These three are among those shot from other locations, so the researchers might have taken that as adequate to implicate Berkut snipers, on the ground at the police barricade - their "Area of Interest."  

There's no explanation I found, aside from the video Experiments at the Intersection of Art, Law and Innovation, where SITU partner Brad Samuels says "There's really good video footage of those three deaths." (43:23) There's also good video of other deaths, but they didn't chose any others. 

From my own small files, 6 shootings, with limited visual detail, so provisional findings of gunfire seemingly from Ukraine Hotel and Arcade Bank just up the street. In one video study (also linked above), we see 2 people behind a low wall shielding them from the police barricade but exposing them to the hotel and to Arcade bank. They're shot, from which of the directions is unclear. Then another rises and starts to run towards the hotel. He has his body turned right to face the street, shield up on his right/back side against the police line. He's shot, it seems, from above and behind, knocking him down and towards the curb. I could be wrong about a visible exit from his chest, but even then, these details seems to line up very well with a newly-opened upper-floor window at Arcade Bank.

Another example from my own small collection: a young man is shielded from police by his shield and a tree he sits against, but he faces the Hotel Ukraine. He looks up, seems to see something at the hotel, and starts to rise just as two shots are fired at him - at least one hits his body and at least one hits his shield, creating a puff of smoke and denting the shield out so it shines a new reflection of sunlight (from the southeast) on the tree. That's clear fire from the hotel, probably upper floors. 

And a third example on YouTube: a protester crosses to aid another who was shot, shield up over his head, protecting against the hotel side. That was wise, but showed mistrust of the hotel people. He's shot as soon as he turns left so as to be briefly unshielded, then he topples away from the hotel. Another just a meter away, crouching with back exposed to the hotel, is then shot, but tips back towards the hotel. Others, including a man with a rifle, have their backs to the hotel the whole time and are never shot. 

Beyond those, just one more I stumbled across the other day: Euromaidan - Mass murder of protesters from sniper fire in Kiev Ukraine - YouTube. At 0:30, another victim is shot near Arcade Bank, tips over away from it, likely shot from it. More shootings are shown, but they didn't seem as clear, and I ran out of time. Here are all 7 mapped on Situ's handy model to show what it all means in 3D. (Some placements are inexact.)

Here's a basic idea topographical view, to show why even with the slope, elevated shooting requires buildings. If it comes from around the police barricades but seems elevated, it probably came from another building that way. not from the police at their ground-level positions.

That's just seven shootings to Situ's three claiming to prove the opposite. I'm open to mixed indications, where the Berkut did shoot some of the protesters. But even with theses cases, it's not very mixed. I'll examine these three now and show that makes ten instances of fatal shooting that apparently came from protester-controlled buildings - including these select cases for the opposite. There are others such that, as I gather, they might all be shot by these mystery snipers and not the blamed Berkut. And if these three examples are the best it gets, alongside the worse cases, that really cements the problem professor Katchanovski has been studying.

The victims in the three cases below were all killed in the same basic area as those 7. SITU's page has a cases section: http://maidan.situplatform.com/report/23#, where each is mapped, with video explanation, archived videos, attached reports from The Ministry of Healthcare of Ukraine, describing the relevant injuries (cited below as "medical report"), and a report from Knox and Associates, LLC, signed by Michael A. Knox, Board Certified Crime Scene Reconstructionist - to determine the approximate distance and direction from which the shots were fired, and to add other notes (cited below as "Knox").

I go through a lot of details that require explanation, Feel free to skim through overly-detailed parts, noting the bolded bits. But if you see a point you want explained, you can go back and check the explanation. It's not so mind-numbing to read once you're motivated. The first case requires an extra-detailed review compared to the other two. Skim-reading may be in order there.

1) Igor F. Dmytriv 

Situ overview: Igor F. Dmytriv was fatally shot at 09:21:59 on February 20, 2014. In two videos capturing the moment of his shooting, Dmytriv can be observed crouching with a shield in a grouping of three other protesters on Instytutska Street. At the time of the fatal gunshot, Dmytriv was oriented southeast with his torso facing Barricade 1 and Barricade 2. Two videos documenting law enforcement officer locations leading up to, during, and after 09:21:59 in the vicinity of Dmytriv are included in the collection of relevant videos. Spatial analysis of bullet trajectory and gunshot audio latency places the shooter causing Dmytriv’s fatal wound within the Area of Interest.

Injuries, Medical report: 4 wounds total, starting with entry and exit wounds to his upper right arm: wound № 1 is "at the front external surface and at the edge of the middle and the lower third, approximately at the height of 164 cm from pelma [soles of the feet] and approximately 24 cm down from the right shoulder joint." wound № 2 "is positioned at the right hand (shoulder level) at the front surface and in the middle third, 169 cm up from pelma and approximately 19,5 cm down from the shoulder joint." But these are hard to consider and we'll focus on the torso injuries. 

Entry: "A wound (wound № 3) is positioned at the chest at the right side surface and at the front inguinal line, 163,5 cm up from pelma and 15 cm to the right from the median line. ...The wound size is approximately 2x1 cm. ... at the right side surface of the chest (and 163,5 cm from pelma) ... "on the front inguinal line," or "between front and middle inguinal lines." I can't place different inguinal lines clearly.  One (the front?) relates to the groin, where the line may extend up the outer edge of abdominal muscles, and the "middle" one may run along the outer hip, so between them is at the curve between the front and the side of his chest. Either way, we have 15cm right of center, which is pretty much on the right side, on a standard torso about 30cm wide.  

Exit: "A wound (wound № 4) is positioned at the abdominal space on the left side surface and to the back from the left middle inguinal line, 143 cm up from pelma and 23,5 cm to the left from omphalos (naval or middle). ... The wound size is approximately 0,3-0,4x1,5 cm. ... at the left side abdominal surface (a little to the back from the relative inguinal line and 143 cm from pelma)." Unless Dmytriv is much fatter than he looks, 23.5 cm left of the naval must be circumferential measure, around to the side and then a bit to the back - the whole torso is usually about 30cm wide or less.

Canal: "The wound canal begins from the wound, goes from the right to the left, from the top to the bottom, a little from the front to the back and ends at the wound № 4. The wound № 4 is positioned ... The wound canal sized approximately 33 cm between the wound № 3 and the wound № 4" ... An irregular oval injury ... is positioned on the right hemidiaphragm at the muscular part at the spine (lumbar part) level 155 cm up from pelma on the side of right peritoneal cavity. The wound canal also includes "the middle part of the right lung at the side surface" and it passes through the left kidney.

Knox: "Dmytriv suffered a single-bullet compound gunshot wound with the bullet, which perforated the right arm and the torso, following a right-to-left, front-to-back, downward trajectory across the body relative to the anatomic position." That's just a nice summary. 

Injuries, mapped vs. modeled

Katchanovski, 2021 report cited this example in detail

"For instance, according to forensic medical examination, Ihor Dmytriv was shot in the “right side surface” and the “left side surface” of the torso “from the right to the left, from the top to the bottom, and a little from the front to the back” with the entry wound 20.5cm higher than the exit wound. A Maidan victims’ lawyer visually demonstrated at the trial that these wounds locations of were in the right and left sides. In the video of their examination of Dmytriv right after his shooting, Maidan medics also show such locations of his wounds with no wounds visible in the front area, contrary to the 3D model. However, in the 3D model, his wounds were moved to the front and the back and made nearly horizontal in order to fit them to the Berkut positions on the ground.54 (See Video Appendix H)."

"Maidan medics also show such locations of his wounds with no wounds visible in the front area, contrary to the 3D model."

All told, I'm not sure how much SITU fudged the diagonal track (front-back vs. side-to-side). To exit somewhat from his back, seems it had to enter a bit on the front, and the track seems roughly "corner" to "corner" either way. As I'll show, there's also an issue with how his body was modeled in the scene that helps bring the blame to the Berkut. What's even more interesting, as Katchanovski also noted, is how the line of fire was "made nearly horizontal," or at least made to appear that way.

First, some given numbers don't add up. The victim is given as 182 cm tall, so an entry wound 163.5cm is at jaw level, not anywhere on his torso, and 143 is at shoulder level, not abdomen. The same numbers appear in the Ukrainian original, so it's not a typo. I don't know what can explain this discrepancy, but as I'll show, it corrects well to go by specific anatomical points referenced, which leads us to shift the wounds, and the suggested descent between them, down about 33cm. 

A good fit for all found with the Pythagorean theorem: A 33 cm wound canal would run 20.5 cm vertically and about 26 cm horizontally through the body - my quick estimate suggest about 26-28cm to cross an average-sized body diagonally. So I suppose these numbers do add up, and only the height of wounds was given differently.

Correcting entry wound level: taking a right arm wound 24 cm down from the shoulder and also 163.5 cm up makes sense only for a giant. But chest wound № 3 is given at the same level (164 cm) which also makes no sense. So maybe it's also about 24cm below the shoulder? That gives an entry almost where Situ shows it (blue dot in my image), but his arm was raised so that its wound would measure a bit lower than the corresponding torso injury. That happens to fit with the described decent and internal injuries. With the entry wound around 133cm up, at the 5th or 6th rib, it would then damage the right middle lung, the diaphragm (magenta curve) just right of the spinal area, and the left kidney (magenta oval). 

I attempted to quantify the bullet track shown In SITU's modeling, estimating the wound locations on an upright body. I may have placed them a bit too low or too level, but I get about 13 cm shown descent vs. 20.5 in the medical report. It could be greater than 13cm, but it's certainly leveled some compared to the medical report.

That difference seems fairly mild, but the victim also seems modeled with a slightly different rotation of head and torso than seen in reality, distorting the suggested trajectory. The video shows Dmytriv's back and right side almost equally, with the left arm just barely visible, while the model shows back side almost totally, with left arm fully visible. His right shoulder also seems modeled lower, pointing almost straight up the sidewalk, in an angled slouch that leans into the bullet, 

All this would makes the different overall rotation less visually obvious, and would help minimize the "downward angle" as more explained by a crouching posture than it actually was. All differences appear mild and hard to quantify, but here I trace outline, apparent median of torso and head, and shoulder position.  

The real angle of fire should be a bit more towards the street from the right, not from up the street or at all from the left side. After the shot, Dmytriv tumbles backwards and left, towards the street, probably from the velocity of the gunshot from ahead and to the right.

The angles here reflect a crouched position, not standing, so some half of this "upward" angle is an illusion, and some of the rightward angle as well. But the rest is no illusion, and all together, it describes a shooter a bit ahead, well to the right, and well elevated. In contrast, SITU's erred modeling produced a shooter at ground level (barely elevated by topography), just slightly to the right but well ahead, on a line crossing both "Militsiya" barricades, with barricade 1 seemingly favored. 

Knox: "As modeled, the trajectory matches the position of Dmytriv’s body as depicted in Videos #1 and #2." But "as modeled" is not how it was. The bullet track was leveled in his body and perhaps shifted to the front-back, then his body slouched down on the right side, and turned to the left. No single aspect was done terribly wrong, but the small effects add up to a rather incorrect result.

Shield and Body Position: 

(revised 3/24): This took some slower re-analysis. To start, Dmytiv was facing less up the street to the southeast than I initially though. An important BBC News video of his shooting from behind at ground level was shot from the sidewalk alongside the hotel (dark blue line in graphics below), not the main sidewalk (about at the green line). From this view, Dmytriv lines up with the distant sign (yellow). It also aligns with the peak of a distant building I think is at 16 Instytutska, although the view here is oddly magnified, and these buildings are obviously downhill from the protesters. 

His shield seems to face roughly ahead on that line - the little forshortening reflects a few degrees to the left - while his body is rotated to face about 2/3 ahead on this line, and about 1/3 or to the left. That's about 30°, perhaps a bit more (30-35°) left of straight ahead on the BLUE line. Relative to the main sidewalk and street here, he's facing around 45-50° to the left of ahead, but his shield is held something like 25-30° to his right. This is consistent with the other view from above, where his shield is not visible (so it doesn't confirm this point either). 

This right-shielding would require a certain position with right hand closer, arm less extended, and likely shoulder back a bit (sketched below, crudely but to scale). The real angle is probably less than the 30° shown here, for a more forward-shielded posture, but somewhat like this. (a graphic that does too much at once, but oh well)

Note how this right-shielded position fits better with both shield and arm damage, and the most side-to-side of the 3 possible bullet tracks here (lime green). The angles: red is SITU - green is what I traced in black - lime green added for options, and it proved a a better fit. Below I add yet another even more side-to-side track that could fit just as well. 

Dmytriv is modeled at one point facing about the right angle (top left), with the slight posture change noted above, but with shield held ahead, not on his right, yielding a different position, with left hand closer, left elbow pulled back. In other views, his head and implied shield seem to face differently, mainly across the street (at right) or completely across the street, with his head turned to face slightly back down the street (bottom left). It could matter that they trace the bullet track in red from the position(s) that appears extra-twisted. (green lines here follow shadows, but that seems to be roughly the same as the unmarked curb, if the sign is set perpendicular to it, like usual) 

Knox: "Video #1 also depicts movement in the metal shield held by Dmytriv in association with the sound of the gunshots indicating that his shield was struck by both shots. The bullet from the second shot inflicted Dmytriv’s wounds." According to the modeling, no shots should have hit his shield. . Katchanovski's work suggests just one bullet hit the shield. Video Appendix H show 2 holes in the front of his shield before this (other frames clarify that's Dmytriv with the same clothes and same shield), and apparently no holes in its side (0:30, held upside-down). After the shooting, a visible new bullet hole appears (1:27) on the right edge. These visuals are not conclusive, but that's about where any new impact has to anyway, given the complex set of observed injuries. 

The shield's right edge seems to be angled slightly to face the right, besides the its mild overall curve to the same effect. This too means the shot came well from his right. The first "impact" could just be from Dmytriv jerking in reaction to the first gunshot nearby. When he's hit, the shield can be seen moving to the right. The lack of new bullet holes in the front again shows he was not shot from ahead, but the injuries always said the same thing anyway. 

Mapping

Knox: the distance from the firearm to the camera/microphone was in the range of 80m to 219m, "consistent with the shots having been fired from somewhere near Barricade #1." But the shield damage and bodily injuries are not consistent with that. 

In his approximate actual position, a shot from the right does not clearly point to the barricade. Depending on the bullet tracks sketched above, it came roughly on one of the red, green, or lime lines, or a similar angle added here in yellow to include Bank Arkada as a possibility. The other lines suggest one of the buildings ahead, with differing elevation-to-distance ratios. The best fit is probably between green and lime, which is occupied by one building of some height, and the low, open patio of another. I know nothing about the status of these buildings, but they're indicated in the other two cases as well, and we'll come back to them more at the end. SITU's line to the barricade is ruled out for being well too far to the left, and because the Berkut at the barricade had no jet packs to hover above the place and provide that downward angle of fire.

Barricade Shooting?

Knox: "Video #2 depicts two separate bursts of firearms discharge residues (smoke) appearing contemporaneously with each of the audible shots. The two separate areas of discharge residues, in conjunction with different pitch and tone values for the audible shots, indicate that two separate shots were fired by two separate individuals, both of whom are located in the area of Barricade #1. ...  his shield was struck by both shots. The bullet from the second shot inflicted Dmytriv’s wounds." 

There may be shooters ahead, blocked from view, and there are Berkut - one of their helmets may be visible (orange), ducking behind the sandbags and junk called a barricade. The second puff of smoke I see is at, or in line with, Dmyriv's shield, in front of a sign (yellow) that, in turn, is in front of the barricade. No Berkut fired from out in front like that, even if the angle of fire might seem plausible.  To me, that smoke seems related to the bullet's impact (vaporized aluminum?). The smoke plume appears so large, I expect i's much closer to the camera, like right at the shield. The smoke from that round's firing is somewhere off-frame, apparently to the right and above. An earlier puff of smoke or dust to the right looks like to me like another round impacting the ground or maybe a sandbag, apparently on this side of a low wall and the barricade, where there is clearly no shooter under the junk. If I'm right about that (no expert), then just the one shot hit Dmytriv and his shield, as the one new hole suggested. And that would mean 2 people fired at once, one shooting the police barricade, as the other killed Mr. Dmytriv. 

2) Andrii Ivanovych Dygdalovych 

Katchanovski's 2021 report makes no mention of this case, so the following analysis should add something.

Situ overview: "A. I. Dygdalovych was fatally shot at 09:22:51. In a video captured near Hotel Ukraine, Dygdalovych can be observed approaching and standing with a group of four other protesters on Instytutska Street. At the time of fatal gunshot, Dygdalovych was oriented southeast with the front of his torso facing Barricade 1 and Barricade 2. Law enforcement officers are visible in the video frame at those locations at the moment of Dygdalovych’s shooting. A video documenting law enforcement unit locations during, and after 09:22:51 in the vicinity of Dygdalovych are included in the collection of relevant videos. Spatial analysis of bullet trajectory and gunshot audio latency places the shooter causing Dygdalovych’s fatal wound within the Area of Interest."

Note: Dmytriv was shot one minute earlier and is still laying where he fell, immobile but still breathing. It seems getting him help was Dygdalovych's mission until he too is shot. Both of them get dragged away by others with no more immediate shootings. 

Just one video is cited, although there is at least one other view from above (see appendix H video, 5:15), as shown at right. Dygdalovych is at center, in camouflage jacket, green helmet, shield up to the left but not ahead, in the moment before he was shot.

Medical report 

Entry: "Wound № 2 is located in the facies anterior of the thoracic cage, on the right side, 157 cm upward, along the cartilages alignment (lineae parasternales), level with the 2nd right rib." Lineae parasternales = parasternal line - a vertical line that, by an image I found and compared to a 15cm half-torso, is 4-4.5cm right of center. It may be even closer to the center, damaging "heart, right atrium," despite being on the right side. 

Exit: "№ 1 wound visible on the right part of the back, 140 cm from the soles upward, on the level in between the shoulder blade line and the median line ... 3 cm rightward of the linea mediana" (middle of the back or spine). The bullet exits 140cm up after entering at 157cm, so it traveled downward 17cm. Note shoulder blades run about the whole length of the rib cage, to about rib 9 or 10, and it seems the exit is near the bottom of that. 

Medical report: "The relative victim and the person who fired the gun position at the firing instant is likely envisaged according to the injuries location. The shot direction - (onto the right upper-body part) is determined: anteroposteriorly (front-to-back), downward and several from left to right." What does "several" mean here? Maybe "barely," or "barely opposite?" To hit and exit on the right side, going left-to-right but damaging the heart, and wind up just 3cm right of center means the entry wound was maybe 1-2 cm right of center, and the 1-2 cm of travel to the right could be ignored to call a front-to-back injury. 

Or, starting at the parasternal line 4-4.5cm right of center, and ending 3cm right of center actually makes for 1-1.5cm of travel right-to-left. So this point has to be left unclear, noting that it's a minor trend either way.

Injuries, mapped vs. modeled

For a given body length 185cm, again the entry and exit wounds come out too high to make sense. This is similar to Dmytriv's case, but less so, with just 9-10 cm discrepancy to his 33cm. This smaller difference is about that if measuring from the toes of extended feet rather than from the soles. The given entry wound to the chest, at 157 cm from the pelma, would be at neck or jaw level. So I shifted the entry to the 2nd rib where they described it, and the exit to 17 cm below that, which comes out about at rib 10. Path: front to back, little to no left-right movement (unclear), and descending 17cm.

In SITU's modeling, a descent is reflected, but grossly muted. -  estimating where the modeling placed the wounds, then a 5.7cm descent is shown (30 pixels), The difference is threefold. This is a major distortion. The wound canal here starts from a lower point around the 3rd or 4th rib, and ends a bit higher than suggested. This "splits the difference" to make the leveling less obvious.

A visible left-to-right angle also seems to clash with the negligible trend described. The whole path seems shifted a bit to the right, making the problem appear even worse than it is, but it seems the exit was shifted more. Entry, as noted, should be 4 or 4.5cm right of center, but here it's more like 7-8cm right (Torso probably ~32cm wide, and it appears roughly halfway between median and side). The exit is near his right armpit, around 12-14 cm from the middle, not 3cm from the median, as reported. That's about 3-4cm shifted in front, 9-11cm in back, for some 5-8 cm of left-to-right motion. That includes and exceeds the described 1-2 cm rightward travel, or it might differ from 1-2 cm travel the other way by up to 10cm.

Knox: injuries not mentioned, but "In Video #3.1, movement of Dygdalovych’s jacket associated with the bullet impact can be seen at t = 113.920 s. The direction of fire is consistent with coming from the area of the barricades." No such movement is clear to me.  SITU's video highlights his upper right back, where there may be some kind of bulge, but it can't be rel

Mapping

Distances estimate: The distance from the firearm to the camera/microphone is calculated at 65m to 128m. "These boundary values are consistent with the shots having been fired from somewhere between Barricade #1 and Dygdalovych" or right at the barricade, as decided, but no further out. 

Position: torso facing roughly straight up this sidewalk, or a few degrees to the left, while his shield is up at an angle to cover his left side more than his front. There's no sign of his shield being hit before he topples sharply downward and seemingly straight back. The suggested fire is basically from the straight ahead, maybe a bit from the left or right, and quite downward. Here are the options, mapped on the model. 

All of these elevated spots are outside the audio-estimated area, and I see no matching, elevated spots within the area. Arcade Bank is partly in the area, but too far to the right. Barricade 1 is in the area, on a good left-of-ahead line, but the Berkut there had no jetpacks. Barricade 2 is a bit uphill and would have shooting from over those trucks, but that's probably not high enough, and it's also deemed out of range. Maybe the estimated area was wrong in this case. This one is not so easy to answer. 

It's also reasonable to suspect the same shooter location as Dmytriv a minute earlier, but the best joint option would be between red & orange here, verging into just "possible" for Dygdalovych and supposedly out of range. Two nearby shooting positions so near the police barricade may not be the most logical or most convenient option, but it seems likely here. 

Barricade Shooting?

Knox: "Taken in context, the physical evidence with respect to the shooting of Dygdalovych indicates that he was likely shot by government personnel located near Barricade #1 in the video." It would need to be a spot in the air above them, but even ignoring that...

There are at least 6 or 7 Berkut snipers seen in CCTV footage from the far side, with 5 or 6 seen from the protesters' side. In the moments before the shooting, one has a rifle he fires to the left, and then we hear another shot with a different sound, from someone else unseen.  Then the Berkut aims the rifle again to the left but doesn't fire, and just before Dygdalovych is shot, he swings it to aim nearly at the camera (closer to D, but not AT him). But there's no sign of discharge from any visible rifles when the fatal shot rings out. He didn't fire that shot, so that rifle has an alibi. Another 2 or 3 rifles are seen just to the right, fired at some points, but not at this crucial one. But another area is invisible behind the shields, so we could imagine anything happening there.

3) Yuriy Grygorovych Parashchuk

Situ overview: "Yu. G. Parashchuk was fatally shot at 09:48:57. In two videos captured near Hotel Ukraine, Parashchuk can be observed crossing Instytutskaya Street with a group of protesters before crouching on the south side of the street in a cluster of trees near Metro Khreshchatyk. At the time of fatal gunshot, Parashchuk was oriented southeast with his head facing Barricade 1 and Barricade 2. Law enforcement officers can be observed in three videos at Barricade 2 at the time of Parashchuk’s shooting. Spatial analysis of bullet trajectory and gunshot audio latency places the shooter causing Parashchuk’s fatal wound within the Area of Interest."

Knox: "Taken in context, the physical evidence with respect to the shooting of Dygdalovych [sic - he was refering to Parashchuk] indicates that he was likely shot by government personnel." 

Medical report: Entry "wound № 2 … is positioned at the parietal region at the left; - Perforating and multifragmental fractures of the skull cap bones, skull covering and calvaria injuries at the left"

Exit "wound № 1 … is positioned at parietal region at the left." Both injuries are in the same area - the major upper back part of the skull, shaded green at right. They're close together, connected by a short canal, or maybe more of a trough in this case.

Canal: "The gunshot wound canal that goes from entrance gunshot wound № 2 is positioned at the parietal region at the left in a direction from the front to the back, a little from the top to the bottom, affecting the skull bones, covering and calvaria, and ends with an exit gunshot wound № 1 at the parietal region at the left." Two consistent angles shown at right. Other angles are possible, and I don't think we can get more exact in this case. But then, I didn't dig as deep into the medical report in this case. 

No left-right direction evident in a front-back trajectory means the bullet came from pretty well straight ahead. It could be from a bit to the left or right, or even two or three bits - it's a short canal and vaguely described. Any downward motion evident in such a short space means a pretty serious elevated shooter, as with the other 2 cases. 

Improper Modeling

In the video, Parashchuk is facing mainly up the street (green lines - copied into a few places for reference - it has a slight curve here), but his posture is clearly rotated to face a bit to the right. Compare to tree ahead (light blue) - he's facing to its right, not directly at it. The modeling ignores this, having him face right up the street and into that tree, or perhaps a tiny bit to the left. His body seems modeled about right relative to the "camera", but the scene is different around him, so he's facing up the street instead of to the right. This will shift the origin of fire to the left, towards SITU's "area of interest." 

Unless they meant the other line (dark blue) was the sidewalk edge, or some alternate edge in an interpolated scene? That would fit poorly with the sign and with other models, but would add several degrees more of "interesting" difference. But the meaning of this line in unclear to me, but it must mean something. It casts a shadow.

The left side of the head is hit better from the left than from the right, but no lateral direction is mentioned in the medical report. Still, Situ decided the fire came well from the left of his body. The view above appears to show a descent, but that's actually travel from the left side (see video, 3:18, 3:27, as shown below). Coming in that left-rotated position, that will shift the fire origin even further to the left, getting it right were they wanted it; they trace the fire to barricade 2, left half, where Berkut with rifles were seen.

I happen to agree he was probably shot from left of straight ahead, and maybe to that degree. But he wasn't facing left across the street. He was facing to the right, somewhat towards Arcade Bank. In context, he topples back and a bit to the right, consistent with a hit somewhat from the left of that position. But straight ahead or even a bit to the right - which would be at the bank - also seem possible.

So we happen to agree on likely left origin of fire, but I have the scene set properly around Mr. Parashchuk (but probably not exactly), while SITU rotated the scene, like it's all on a giant "lazy Susan," so they could have that red line land at barricade 2. Well, first it lands some meters above that point, and then there's the ignored downward angle, yet again, and then the blame drops right on the cops.

Barricade Shooting?

Situ video notes discharge from a Berkut weapon at barricade 2, at one point in the long video 3, but not at the moment Parashchuk is shot. They argue that the fatal shot were fired from there, but it is odd how it wound up less visible than other shots. Or do they have an alibi of not shooting then? 

Shot from Behind? 

Professor Katchanovski, at ConsortiumNews, raised one ill-founded question here:

"In the case of Yuriy Parashchuk, forensic medical examinations found that his entry and exit wounds were in the back of his head on the left side. But the 3D analysis moved the entry wound location to the front area and changed its somewhat top-to-bottom direction to nearly horizontal. Frames from a video by a French photographer shows a large bullet hole in the back of Parashchuk’s red helmet. How can he be shot in the back of his head by the Berkut police on a nearly similar horizontal level?"

The 2021 report continued this:

"[F]orensic medical examinations by the government experts for the prosecution, a testimony of his sister at the trial, and a single bullet hole in his helmet in synchronized videos show that Yuri Parashchuk was killed in the back of his head when he faced the Berkut police. This evidence suggest that he was shot from the Bank Arkada in the Maidan-controlled area. (See Video Appendix H)."

But he's seen facing roughly SE towards police line, with the bank to his right, not behind. Helmet and damage - apparent bullet entry - visible early in this video, but I'm not sure what side that is.

It's not clear to me that Situ shifted the entry to the front; the parietal region is large, starting just about where they placed the entry wound. Maybe medical photos clarify that point. The medical report does describe entry and exit wounds, confusingly, at the same spot, but it also describes the path between them as "front to the back" besides a little from the top to the bottom. If that were backward, then it's backwards in the medical report too, and real angle would be from behind and slightly UP. That makes no sense, except maybe for a Hotel Ukraine basement window. 

The medical report could be wrong, but Katchanovski doesn't seem to suspect this, and unless there's better evidence (like contradictory photographs), it's best to defer. IF the helmet damage suggests an opposite trajectory, it's probably because Parashchuk was wearing it backwards. 

Furthermore, he topples backwards, probably due to the bullet's velocity in that direction. There's a sidewalk impact just ahead of him a moment earlier - hitting at the base of a low wall on the southeast side, making a puff of concrete dust. That probably came from ahead, not from behind Paraschuk. And the dust seems propelled to the left and down the street, maybe because that shot also came from ahead and to the camera's right.

Mapping

video 4: distance from camera in a range between 72 meters (between Barricade #1 and Parashchuk) up to 245] m = between Barricade #1 and Barricade #2. Video #5 - near Barricade #1 to beyond Barricade #2.

3 plausible directions to the left in red, and 3 to the right in orange - best fit for injury and collapse is straight ahead (white) or the nearest positions to the left or right. That's at Specialized school No. 94 "Hellada" at Olhynska St, 2/4 - a spot I know nothing about. An open balcony there is also noted in green, but it's probably too low and too open to work. The best elevation is available some degrees to the right, at Arcade Bank, SE end, which also seems possible, given the victim's actual position. A left angle also seems plausible, but 10 Insytutska st. seems a bit too short to fit the bill. Barricade 1 is ruled out by being too far left, relative to the victim's actual position, and also the Berkut had no jetpacks. 

Conclusion

As noted above, SITU claimed this sniper modeling was done "in the service of human rights fact-finding and reporting." It was used in court in efforts to convict certain men who could be innocent, at the risk of absolving the true killers, and in the service of cementing a rather dubious narrative as legal fact. Over and over, we can see their modeling errors happen de-elevate the shooters to street level, and to tweak the injuries, postures, or spatial orientation of the victims, always to the effect of pointing to the police barricades. That is a politically useful direction for the Ukrainian prosecutors, for their bosses, and for their foreign backers. Would they have commissioned the study otherwise? 

If only solicited expert distortions can make their case, and only this well, after having the chance to select three best examples ... the prosecutors must realize their case is deeply, deeply flawed. But they flaunt it because that's their job, and the authors get it approved by others doing their jobs. Those foreign, "Euro-Atlantic" backers have ways of compromising or running foundations to finance little magic shows just like this, and the New York Times, for one, can be counted on to help elevate it into millions of minds, as a newsworthy "fact" of global relevance. It's not clear how conscious they are of all this, but ... it's hard to imagine so many distortions were modeled in accidentally, with no one at SITU noticing. 

Buildings Review

New IDs - maybe someone has info on them. 

* Instytutska St, 10 - 2-story - includes Committee on construction, town planning and housing and communal services. It's next to police barricade 2, but they may have been too busy to prevent someone breaking in by a back door. - showed it above - no muzzle flashes I can see, no movement on the roof, but ... it's better than invisible Berkut floating above their barricade to the left.

* Specialized school No. 94 "Hellada" at Olhynska St, 2/4 - 4 story - center of map below, just south of "140" - not as close to the barricade, so likely more accessible to false-flag criminals, and with better elevation, and not much greater distance. It's not visible from many views, but would overlook the metro station and some exposed positions, like Mr. Parashchuk. 

In front of the latter, a low, open balcony of another building is probably unsuitable, but would have the same view. Behind it not so far is the taller 1 Bankova street, but it's just outside the estimated shooting distances, from Knox and Associates, for these 3 cases. for what it's worth, further out is the much taller 18A Instytutska st.

I had looked into sniper positions before, in 2014. I wrote this, and it's not bad: Who was Maidan snipers' mastermind? - OrientalReview.org - map from this is below. Glad I made it. I somehow underrated the clarity of fire from the hotel, being overly-focused on new spots, to be special. I might do the same here, but ... well, I gave the reasons why those are my special suggestions. 

BBC's Gatehouse had reported on sniper fire from Hotel Ukraine, then asked around for a later report. He had people suggest the Nat bank building and Bankova st. 1 as relevant sniper perches, presumably government-held. The latter does stand out, perhaps tall enough to overcome that distance. On the same line but closer and more likely relevant, Instytutska St, 10 (not noted on the map - at center under the word "barricade"). 

I had noted a closer "Minister's Club" - presumably government-held, but perhaps overrun. I forget now exactly why, but it might be a contender for any shooting that did come from around barricade 2, especially if it seemed bit left and a bit high for them. Arcade Bank panned out. I was fixated on the NW wing, but some cases might indicate its far, SE end. The "House of Chimeras" direction - from prosecutor general's update - is interesting. It points to this far end of the bank, which can matter for elevated shooting, and which came up. House of Chimeras can hardly fit unless it's an enormously tall place, which it isn't.

more sources

Did Police Kill These Protesters in Ukraine? What the Videos Show - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

CHRS Project Featured in the New York Times - Center for Human Rights Science - Carnegie Mellon University (cmu.edu)

IRF.UA "How it really happened: reconstruction of Euromaidan … ": 403 Forbidden

Situ "practice note" published in the Journal of Human Rights Practice in April 2018: Reconstructing Human Rights Violations Using Large Eyewitness Video Collections: The Case of Euromaidan Protester Deaths | Journal of Human Rights Practice | Oxford Academic (oup.com): paywalled

SITU partner Brad Samuels also gave a presentation on the Euromaidan Event Reconstruction as a visiting artist at Yale University in fall 2017. Bradley Samuels: Experiments at the Intersection of Art, Law and Innovation - YouTube

Critical response: Katchanovski, April 22, 2019 The Buried Maidan Massacre and Its Misrepresentation by the West (consortiumnews.com) 

Question Answered: Who Was Behind the 2014 Maidan Massacre? (internationalist.org)