Plevako Fedor Nikiforovich (1842–1908) is the largest pre-revolutionary Russian lawyer, whose name is well known not only in our country, but also far beyond its borders. F. N. Plevako received his legal education at Moscow University. Soon after the introduction of the Judicial Statutes of 1864, he entered the legal profession and was a sworn attorney at the Moscow Judicial Chamber. Gradually, from trial to trial, with his intelligent, heartfelt speeches, he won wide recognition and fame as an outstanding judicial speaker. He always carefully prepared for the case, knew all its circumstances well, was able to deeply analyze evidence and show it to the court inner meaning certain phenomena. His speeches were distinguished by great psychological depth, clarity and simplicity. He illuminated the most complex human relationships and sometimes insoluble everyday situations in an accessible, understandable form for listeners, with special inner warmth. In the words of A.F. Koni, this was “... a person who oratory turned into inspiration."
In court speeches, he did not limit himself to covering only the legal side of the case under consideration. In a number of court appearances, F. N. Plevako touched upon large social issues, which were in the field of view and worried the advanced public.
One cannot forget his angry words addressed to Mother Superior Mitrofania:
“A traveler walking past the high walls of the Vladychny Monastery, entrusted to the moral guidance of this woman, devoutly crosses himself on the golden crosses of the temples and thinks that he is walking past the house of God, and in this house the morning bell aroused the abbess and her servants not to prayer, but to dark deeds !
Instead of a temple there is a stock exchange; instead of praying people there are swindlers and buyers of counterfeit documents; together prayers are an exercise in composing bill texts; instead of deeds of good - preparation for false testimony - this is what was hidden behind the walls.
The monastery walls in our ancient monasteries hide worldly temptations from the monk, but this is not the case with Abbess Mitrofania...
Build higher, higher the walls of the communities entrusted to you, so that the world cannot see the deeds that you do under the “cover of the cassock and monastery!..”
F. N. Plevako also touches on pressing social issues in other speeches. Thus, speaking in defense of the Luthorian peasants who rebelled against inhuman exploitation and immeasurable extortions, he says;
“When we are exacted what is not due from us, we worry and lose our composure; We worry when we lose either a small share of our income, or something we can gain or fix.
But a man's ruble is rare and comes at a high price. With the blood ruble taken away from him, the happiness and future of his family often go away, eternal slavery begins, eternal dependence on the world-eaters and the rich. Once a broken farm dies, the farmhand is condemned for the rest of his life to seek work from the strong as if it were a blessing, and to kiss the hand that gives him a penny for work that brings benefits to another worth hundreds of rubles, to kiss it like the hand of a benefactor, and to cry and ask for a new benefit, new bonded labor for crumbs of bread and miserable rags.”
Plevako never relied solely on his talent. The basis of his success was great hard work, persistent work on words and thoughts.
F. N. Plevako is the most colorful figure among the largest pre-revolutionary lawyers; he stood out sharply with his bright personality among the pre-revolutionary bar, which was not poor in talented speakers.
A.F. Koni characterized Plevako’s talent this way: “... through the outer appearance of the defender stood a tribune, for whom the matter was only an excuse and who was hampered by the fence of a particular case, which constrained the flapping of his wings, with all their inherent strength.”
Speaking about Plevako, V.V. Veresaev in one of his memoirs conveys the following story about him:
“His main strength lay in his intonation, in the genuine, downright magical infectiousness of feeling with which he knew how to ignite the listener. Therefore, his speeches on paper do not even remotely convey their amazing power.
A priest was tried for committing a serious crime, of which he was completely exposed, and the defendant did not deny guilt.
After the thunderous speech of the prosecutor, Plevako spoke. He rose slowly, pale, agitated. His speech consisted of only a few phrases...
“Gentlemen, jurors! The matter is clear. The prosecutor is absolutely right in everything - the defendant committed all these crimes and confessed to them. What is there to argue about? But I draw your attention to this. There is a man sitting in front of you who, for THIRTY YEARS, absolved all your sins in confession. Now he is waiting from you: will you forgive him his sin?” And he sat down. Talking about another case, Veresaev writes:
“The prosecutors knew Plevako’s strength. An old woman stole a tin teapot that cost less than 50 kopecks. She was a hereditary honorary citizen and, as a person of the privileged class, was subject to trial by jury. Whether by dress or by whim, Plevako acted as the old woman’s defender. The prosecutor decided in advance to paralyze the influence of Plevako’s defensive speech and himself expressed everything that could be said in defense of the old woman: poor old woman, bitter need, the theft is insignificant, the defendant does not evoke indignation, but only pity. But property is sacred. All our civic welfare rests on property; if we allow people to shake it, the country will perish.
Plevako stood up.
– Russia had to endure many troubles, many trials during its more than thousand-year existence. The Pechenegs tormented her, as did the Polovtsians, Tatars and Poles. Twelve tongues attacked her and took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, and only grew stronger and stronger from the trials. But now, now... The old lady stole an old teapot worth 30 kopecks. Russia, of course, cannot stand this; it will perish irrevocably.”
But not only the jury succumbed to the charm of Plevako’s great talent, and the crown judges often found themselves under the spell of his great, strong and subtle psychological influence.
Plevako’s comparisons and images are very strong, convincing, and deeply memorable. Figurative comparisons further enhance the impression of his spectacular speeches.
Plevako’s speech in defense of Bartenev in the case of the murder of artist Visnovskaya is a brilliant example of Russian judicial eloquence. It is distinguished exclusively by psychological depth, a subtle analysis of the mental state of the murdered woman and the defendant. This speech is impeccable in its style and is distinguished by high artistry. The analysis of the psychological state of the young, successful artist and the defendant is given with exceptional depth and talent.
Almost without examining the issues of the crime, and the circumstances of the case did not require this, Plevako, with the brush of a great artist, figuratively paints the situation in which the crime matured.
This speech deeply and truthfully depicts the inner and external world the young, beautiful, talented actress Visnovskaya, who successfully performed on the stage of the Warsaw Imperial Theater. Skillfully touching upon and showing the inner springs of mental discord of a young, enjoying great success women, Plevako truthfully depicts the situation of the crime.
This speech rightfully became famous far beyond Russia.
From the speeches presented in the collection, the reader can get a sufficient impression of the work of this talented lawyer and outstanding judicial speaker.
The second half of the 19th century - the “golden age” Russian Bar Association. The judicial reform of 1864 radically changed the justice system in Russia. Instead of the former secret, closed court, drowning in a sea of papers, open jury trials and an institution of public defenders independent from the state appeared. Among the luminaries of that time, Fyodor Nikiforovich Plevako was truly unique - a brilliant speaker who never prepared speeches in advance, but improvised with inspiration and often saved clients from inevitable punishment with his wit alone.
Over the 40 years of his career, the “Moscow Zlatoust” conducted more than 200 trials and won almost all of them. As a rule, these were the most high-profile litigation in the country. People lined up to see Plevako several years in advance. He was distinguished by his good nature and gentleness, and freely helped the poor. Moreover, he gave them shelter in his house and paid expenses for the entire duration of the proceedings. He took human suffering to heart and knew how to speak about it soulfully in court, as if he had gone through it personally. However, in his life there really were enough tragedies and farces - Anews recalls this.
Fedor grew up as a disenfranchised “outcast” under a false name
Fyodor Nikiforovich was born in April 1842 in Troitsk, lost in the Orenburg steppes. His paternal surname is Plevak, his real patronymic is Vasilyevich. He was considered illegitimate because his parents - a customs official from the Ukrainian or Belarusian impoverished nobles and a Kyrgyz or Kazakh serf - were not in a church marriage. In Russia, until 1902, such children were deprived of all rights and were not considered heirs. The patronymic Nikiforovich and, by the way, the original surname Nikiforov, came to him from godfather, a runaway serf who served his father. Only at the university did Fyodor Nikiforov obtain permission to take his father’s last name, and after graduation, for the sake of euphony, he added the letter O to it, and pronounced it with an emphasis - Plevako. However, he still went down in history as Plevako.
From childhood, Fyodor remembered one particularly humiliating moment: when he, the best second-grader, was amazed by his ability to perform actions in his mind with three digit numbers, was expelled in disgrace from the exemplary Moscow Commercial School simply because he was illegitimate. “God forgive them! They really didn’t know what these narrow-minded people were doing when they performed human sacrifice,” he wrote many years later. He completed his studies at another gymnasium, where his father managed to get him settled after a long ordeal through the authorities, at the cost of his own health.
Fyodor made his first “defensive speech” in infancy - and saved his life
In those days, living unmarried was a great shame for a woman; society considered her a harlot. Ekaterina Stepanovna once confessed to her son that, unable to withstand the constant bullying of her neighbors, she grabbed him, a newborn, and in despair ran to drown himself. But on the cliff itself, Fyodor began to cry, so much so that he instantly brought his distraught mother to her senses.
Ekaterina Stepanovna
Over time this family history was overgrown with fictitious details: that some Cossack stopped the woman and begged her to give him the child to raise, and that then, by a lucky chance, he himself met the boy’s father, who recognized him and returned him home. In such a distorted form, it is still found in lawyer biographies.
Plevako was ugly and clumsy, but he transformed fabulously on the podium
Already at the age of 25, a graduate of the Law Faculty of Moscow University became known as a gifted, strong lawyer, and at the age of 28 he became known as one of the best in Moscow. From his first fee, he bought himself a tailcoat for 200 rubles - a luxury unthinkable at that time. Outwardly, he was unprepossessing: small, slanted, with a sparse beard. But during his performances he looked like an eagle.
This is how Plevako was described by his contemporary, the famous lawyer and judge Anatoly Fedorovich Koni: “The high-cheekbone, angular face of the Kalmyk type with widely spaced eyes, with unruly strands of long black hair could be called ugly if it were not illuminated by the inner beauty that showed through in general animated expression, sometimes in a kind, lion-like smile, sometimes in the fire and sparkle of speaking eyes. His movements were uneven and sometimes awkward; The lawyer's tailcoat sat awkwardly on him, and his lisping voice seemed to run counter to his calling as an orator. But in this voice there were notes of such strength and passion that it captured the listener and conquered him.”
Plevako failed his first case miserably
His first client was a moneylender, to whom Fyodor pawned a cigarette case in order to celebrate either Christmas or Easter with the proceeds of 25 rubles. He asked the young lawyer to help resolve the case of collecting the bill, and Plevako immediately made a mistake on the issue of jurisdiction, filing a petition with the District Court instead of the Trial Chamber. He lost, but not miserably: his performance was generally liked, and the newspapers mentioned his name for the first time in their reports.
Sometimes, by mistake, Plevako's first case is considered to be another of his early lost cases. His client Alexei Maruev was then found guilty of two forgeries and exiled to Siberia, despite the contradictions identified by the lawyer in the testimony of witnesses.
Plevako lost the biggest case of his life
Indeed, it dragged on for 20 years, and even the “genius of words” was unable to do it. This was the divorce proceedings of millionaire Vasily Demidov from the famous clan of “linen kings”. It turned into a deep personal drama for Plevako. Having undertaken to help Demidov’s wife, who was seeking freedom from her unloved husband, he himself fell in love with her and started a family with her.
Maria Demidova
But the relationship could not be legalized until the merchant gave a divorce, and he was stubborn until his death.
Vasily Demidov
The three common children of Plevako and Demidova faced the painfully familiar fate of illegitimate outcasts. Avoiding this at all costs, the lawyer recorded them as foundlings, and only years later was he able to file a petition to assign them their own patronymic and surname.
The eldest daughter of Plevako and Demidova Varvara
Maria Demidova with their common son Sergei
Already in legally married: the Plevako couple with children
Having become immensely rich, Plevako fell into riotous lordship
From the age of 36, Fedor Plevako earned huge money. He bought a luxurious two-story mansion on Novinsky Boulevard and lived a bohemian life - he dashed around Moscow in a troika with bells, threw grand drinking parties with gypsies, to whom he threw thousands, sang songs until the morning. And it happened that he chartered a steamer and set off on a voyage along the Volga in a circle of acquaintances and strangers. On these occasions he said that he had gone to stay with a friend in Samara to have a pleasant time chatting by the fireplace.
Novinsky Boulevard at the beginning of the 20th century. In the depths of the frame, opposite the tram, two side wings of Plevako’s house and a garden between them are visible
At the same time, he never refused poor clients and donated huge sums to the crippled and orphans. But he literally extorted wild fees from merchants, demanding payment in advance. They tell how a certain rich man, not understanding the word “advance”, asked Plevako what it was. “Do you know the deposit?” - asked the lawyer. - "I know". - “So the advance is the same deposit, but three times more.”
Plevako was not always sure of the innocence of his clients
One day a crowd of three thousand gathered to listen to the trial, where the famous Plevako spoke. Two brothers were tried for theft during construction, their guilt was obvious. Everyone waited in trepidation that after the lawyer’s speech, the attitude towards the defendants magically will change and they will be acquitted. But the unheard of happened: Plevako jumped up and in the heat of the moment began to prove their guilt, while refuting his own colleague, the second defender, who managed to speak earlier. The jury immediately returned a verdict: guilty.
A sensational rumor immediately spread across Moscow that they themselves higher power they administer justice through Plevako, who enters a state of trance during the trials.
Fyodor Nikiforovich himself clarified his position when defending Alexandra Maksimenko in 1890, who was accused of poisoning her own husband. He said bluntly: “If you ask me if I am convinced of her innocence, I will not say yes, I am convinced.” I don't want to lie. But I am not convinced of her guilt either. When you have to choose between life and death, then all doubts must be resolved in favor of life.”
And yet Plevako avoided knowingly wrong deeds. For example, he refused to defend the notorious swindler Sofya Bluvshtein, nicknamed “Sonka the Golden Pen.”
Shackling Sonya, 1881
Plevako was not an erudite - he often took advantage of his humor and ingenuity
Although he was well read and had an exceptional memory, he was inferior to other luminaries in depth of analysis, logic and consistency. But he surpassed them all in infectious sincerity, emotional power, oratorical inventiveness, he knew how to convince and move, he was a master of beautiful comparisons, loud phrases and unexpected witty antics, which often became the only salvation of his clients. This is evident from his performances, which are still legendary today.
1. Sinful father
An elderly priest was tried for stealing church money. He himself confessed to everything, the witnesses spoke out against him, the prosecutor made a damning speech. Plevako, who made a bet with the manufacturer Savva Morozov in the presence of Nemirovich-Danchenko as a witness that he would complete his speech in one minute and the priest would be acquitted, remained silent throughout the meeting and did not ask a single question. single issue. When his moment came, he only said, sincerely addressing the jury: “Gentlemen of the jury! For more than twenty years, my client has absolved you of your sins. Now he is waiting for you to forgive him his sins once, Russian people!” Father was acquitted.
2. Old lady and teapot
In the trial of the old woman Antonina Pankratyeva, who stole a tin teapot worth 30 kopecks from a merchant’s counter, the prosecutor, wanting to disarm Plevako in advance, himself expressed everything possible in favor of the accused: she herself is poor, and the theft is trivial, and I feel sorry for the old woman... But property is sacred , he continued menacingly, the entire improvement of the country is supported by it, “and if people are allowed to ignore this, Russia will perish.” Plevako stood up and said: “Russia has suffered many troubles and tragedies over a thousand years. Mamai came towards her, and the Pechenegs, Tatars, and Polovtsians tormented her. Napoleon marched against it and took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, and only grew stronger and stronger from the trials. But now... An old woman stole a teapot worth 30 kopecks, and I can’t help but feel creepy. Holy Rus' will not withstand such a test; it will certainly perish.” Pankratyeva was acquitted.
3. A man and a prostitute
Once Plevako had the opportunity to defend a man whom a prostitute accused of rape in order to recover a substantial sum from him. They were about to condemn him when the lawyer took the floor: “Gentlemen of the jury, if you sentence my client to a fine, then I ask you to deduct from this amount the cost of washing the sheets that the plaintiff soiled with her shoes.” The indignant girl jumped up: “He’s lying! Why am I a pig to dirty the bed? I took off my shoes!” There was laughter in the hall. Naturally, the man was acquitted.
"Tsar Cannon, Tsar Bell and Fyodor Nikiforovich Plevako"
When the brilliant lawyer died at the age of 66 from a broken heart, one of the newspapers wrote: “There were three attractions in Moscow: the Tsar Cannon, the Tsar Bell and Fyodor Nikiforovich Plevako. Yesterday our city lost one of them.”
He was buried in front of a huge crowd of people of all classes, both poor and rich, in the cemetery of the Sorrowful Monastery.
Farewell to Fyodor Nikiforovich Plevako
When the monastery graveyard was demolished during the Stalin years, out of 2,500 burials, only Plevako’s ashes were allowed to be transferred to the Vagankovskoye cemetery.
Original dilapidated tombstone
On the modern tombstone of the great Russian lawyer is carved a biblical truth, which he used in one of his speeches: “Judge not with hatred, but judge with love, if you want the truth.”
Modern bas-relief
Popular rumor has turned the word "Plevako" into a symbol of the highest professionalism. And if someone needed a good lawyer, they would say “I’ll find myself a Gobber,” associating with this word-name the idea of a lawyer whose skill one could fully rely on.
All of Russia passed in front of lawyer Plevako in trials. Workers and peasants, industrialists and financiers, local nobility and princes, confessors and military men, students and revolutionaries - everyone believed in the power of his powerful word and the extraordinary nature of his personality.
Plevako lost his first case. However, from a detailed report on the case in Moskovskie Vedomosti, his name became famous, and a few days later Plevako had his first client - an unprepossessing little man with a case involving 2,000 rubles. Plevako won this case and, having earned himself a substantial sum of 200 rubles, acquired the most necessary thing at that time - his own tailcoat.
A.P. wrote about the captivating power of the Plevakin word. Chekhov: “Plevako comes up to the music stand, looks at the jury for half a minute and begins to speak. His speech is even, soft, sincere... Figurative expressions, good thoughts and many other beauties... The diction penetrates into the very soul, fire looks out of the eyes... No matter how much Plevako talks, you can always listen to him without boredom..."
Wit, resourcefulness, instant reaction to the enemy's remarks, appropriate sarcasm - all these qualities were clearly demonstrated by the outstanding speaker.
Plevako had the habit of beginning his speech in court with the phrase: “Gentlemen, it could have been worse.” And no matter what case the lawyer came across, he did not change his phrase. One day Plevako undertook to defend a man who raped his own daughter. The hall was packed, everyone was waiting for the lawyer to begin his defense speech. Is it really from your favorite phrase? Incredible. But Plevako stood up and calmly said: “Gentlemen, it could have been worse.” And then the judge himself could not stand it. “What,” he cried, “tell me, what could be worse than this abomination?” “Your honor,” asked Plevako, “what if he raped your daughter?”
A textbook example was the case of an old woman who stole a tin teapot worth 50 kopecks. At the trial, the prosecutor, knowing that Plevako would defend the old woman, decided in advance to paralyze the impact of his upcoming speech and himself expressed everything that could be used to mitigate the sentence: an old sick woman, bitter need, a minor theft, the accused arouses pity, not indignation. Yet property, the prosecutor emphasized, is sacred, and if it is allowed to be encroached upon, the country will perish.
After listening to the speech of the prosecutor, Plevako stood up and said: “Russia had to endure many troubles and trials over more than a thousand years of existence. The Pechenegs tormented her, the Polovtsy, the Tatars, the Poles. Twelve languages fell upon her, they took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, only "I grew stronger and stronger from the trials. But now, now... the old woman stole a teapot worth fifty kopecks. Russia, of course, cannot stand this; from this she will perish irrevocably." Plevako’s brilliant impromptu saved the woman from prison, and the court acquitted her.
According to contemporaries, the main strength of his speeches was the impact on the feelings of his listeners, his ability to “see” the jury and judges and force them to follow him, to cause delight or tears in them, thereby confirming the correctness of Horace’s expression: “Cry yourself if you want.” to make me cry."
It is not surprising that Plevako’s passionate, picturesque performances not only triumphantly saved, but also killed. Indicative in this regard was the case of the manager of the Moscow hotel “Montenegro”, a certain Frolov, who was prosecuted for arbitrariness.
One girl came to Moscow from the provinces and stayed at this hotel, occupying a separate room on the third floor. It was already past midnight when the tipsy Frolov decided to pay her a “visit”. The girl, awakened by a knock, refused to let him in, after which, on Frolov’s orders, floor polishers began to break down the door. At that moment, when the door cracked, a girl in only a shirt, in 25-degree frost, jumped out of the window. Luckily for her, there was a lot of snow in the yard, and she didn’t hurt herself to death, although she did break her arm.
When considering the case in court, the prosecutor “naively” refused to understand why the girl was so scared and why she jumped out of the window at the risk of her life.
The prosecutor's confusion was resolved by Plevako, who defended the interests of the victim. His speech was brief and boiled down to drawing the following parallel: “In distant Siberia,” said Plevako, “in the dense taiga there is an animal, which fate has awarded with a fur coat as white as snow. This is an ermine. When he escapes from an enemy who is ready to tear him to pieces, and "On the way, he encounters a dirty puddle that he has no time to avoid; he prefers to surrender to the enemy rather than soil his snow-white fur coat. And I understand why the victim jumped out the window." Without adding another word, Plevako sat down. However, more was not required of him. The judges sentenced Frolov to death.
The priest was tried. He caused a great mischief. Guilt was proven. The defendant himself confessed to everything. Plevako stood up. “Gentlemen of the jury! The matter is clear. The prosecutor is absolutely right in everything. The defendant committed all these crimes and confessed to them himself. What is there to argue about? But I draw your attention to this. Sitting in front of you is a man who gave you a prison sentence for thirty years. "Confess your sins. Now he is waiting from you: will you forgive him his sins." The priest was acquitted.
One day Plevako came across a case regarding the murder of his wife by a man. The lawyer came to the court as usual, calm and confident of success, and without any papers or cheat sheets. And so, when it was the defense’s turn, Plevako stood up and said: “Gentlemen of the jury!”
The noise in the hall began to subside. Spit again:
There was dead silence in the hall. Lawyer again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
There was a slight rustle in the hall, but the speech did not begin. Again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
Here the dissatisfied roar of the people, who had been waiting for the long-awaited spectacle, echoed in the hall. And Plevako again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
Something unimaginable began. The hall roared along with the judge, prosecutor and assessors. And finally, Plevako raised his hand, calling on the people to calm down.
- Well, gentlemen, you couldn’t stand even 15 minutes of my experiment. What was it like for this unfortunate man to listen to 15 years of unfair reproaches and the irritated nagging of his grumpy woman over every insignificant trifle?!
The audience froze, then burst into delighted applause. The man was acquitted.
The defense of the owner of a small shop, a semi-literate woman, by lawyer F.N. Plevako, who violated the rules on trading hours and closed the trade 20 minutes later than expected, on the eve of some event, is very well known. religious holiday. The court hearing in her case was scheduled for 10 o'clock. The court left 10 minutes late. Everyone was present, except for the defender - Plevako. The chairman of the court ordered to find Plevako. About 10 minutes later, Plevako slowly entered the hall, calmly sat down in the place of protection and opened his briefcase. The chairman of the court reprimanded him for being late. Then Plevako pulled out his watch, looked at it and stated that it was only five minutes past ten on his watch. The chairman pointed out to him that it was already 20 minutes past ten on the wall clock. Plevako asked the chairman: “What time is it on your watch, Your Excellency?” The chairman looked and replied:
- At my fifteen minutes past ten. Plevako turned to the prosecutor:
- What about your watch, Mr. Prosecutor? The prosecutor, clearly wanting to cause trouble for the defense attorney, replied with a malicious smile:
- It’s already twenty-five minutes past ten on my watch.
He could not know what trap Plevako had set for him and how much he, the prosecutor, helped the defense.
The judicial investigation ended very quickly. Witnesses confirmed that the defendant closed the shop 20 minutes late. The prosecutor asked to find the defendant guilty. The floor was given to Plevako. The speech lasted two minutes. He declared:
- The defendant was really 20 minutes late. But, gentlemen of the jury, she is an old woman, illiterate, and doesn’t know much about watches. You and I are literate and intelligent people. How are things going with your watches? When the wall clock shows 20 minutes, Mr. Chairman has 15 minutes, and Mr. Prosecutor’s clock has 25 minutes. Of course, Mr. Prosecutor has the most reliable watch. So my watch was 20 minutes slow, so I was 20 minutes late. And I always considered my watch to be very accurate, because I have a gold, Moser watch.
So if Mr. Chairman, according to the prosecutor’s watch, opened the hearing 15 minutes late, and the defense attorney arrived 20 minutes later, then how can you demand that an illiterate tradeswoman have a better watch and have a better understanding of time than the prosecutor and I?
The jury deliberated for one minute and acquitted the defendant.
Plevako Fedor Nikiforovich (1842-1909) - one of the largest pre-revolutionary Russian lawyers, lawyer, judicial speaker, actual state councilor. He knew how to convince and protect. In 1870 he graduated from the Faculty of Law of Moscow University. Deputy 3rd State Duma from the Octobrist party. Supporter democratic principles legal proceedings. For representatives of the legal profession, all Russians, the name Plevako was and remains the embodiment of the excellent qualities of a lawyer, a defender of goodness and justice, caring for the good and prosperity of the Fatherland.
Among the pre-revolutionary lawyers, it was Plevako who was distinguished by his amazing eloquence and impeccable skill in rhetoric.
It is his speeches that are famous a huge amount references to biblical texts, the constant study of which endowed Plevako with a keen sense of words and very accurate and calm speech. Plevako’s oratorical talent is still an interesting and insufficiently studied phenomenon. Plevako's judicial speeches were characterized by reasonableness, calmness of tone, and a deep analysis of facts and events. It is not for nothing that Plevako received the following definitions: “great orator”, “genius of speech”, “senior hero”, “metropolitan of the legal profession”, etc. He enjoyed boundless respect from both the intelligentsia and the common people.
Plevako was one of those pre-revolutionary lawyers who developed the foundations of Russian judicial rhetoric.
Plevako’s participation in sensational criminal trials is a separate topic for serious scientific discussion.
Just some of the cases in which Plevako brilliantly participated:
The Case of the Luthorian Peasants;
Zamyatnin case;
Lukashevich case;
The case of the Sevsky peasants;
The case of the Konshin factory workers;
Bartenev case;
Maksimenko case;
The Gruzinsky case;
The Zasulich case.
Quotes from Plevako
All famous lawyers pre-revolutionary Russia left a deep mark not only in the history of law, but also in the history of literature. Their judicial speeches are replete with expressions that are themselves aphorisms. Many expressions of pre-revolutionary lawyers are actively used in fiction, and in journalism. And right here in special row there are quotes from Plevako, which in certain circles became aphorisms. Here are some of them:
“A swear word is an interjection in the folk language.”
“Behind the prosecutor is the law, and behind the lawyer is a man with his own destiny, with his own aspirations, and this man climbs onto the lawyer, seeks his protection, and it is very scary to slip with such a burden.”
“There are moments when the soul is indignant at untruth, at the sins of others, indignant in the name of the moral rules in which it believes and lives, and, indignant, strikes the one with whom it is indignant... Thus, Peter strikes a slave who insults his teacher. There is still guilt here, incontinence, a lack of love for the fallen, but the guilt is more excusable than the first, for the act is not caused by weakness, not by self-love, but by a jealous love for truth and justice.”
Fragments from the legendary trials of Plevako.
"20 minutes"
Lawyer F.N. Plevako’s defense of the owner of a small shop, a semi-literate woman, who violated the rules on trading hours and closed the trade 20 minutes later than expected, on the eve of some religious holiday, is very well known. The court hearing in her case was scheduled for 10 o'clock. The court left 10 minutes late. Everyone was present, except for the defender - Plevako. The chairman of the court ordered to find Plevako. About 10 minutes later, Plevako slowly entered the hall, calmly sat down in the place of protection and opened his briefcase. The chairman of the court reprimanded him for being late. Then Plevako pulled out his watch, looked at it and stated that it was only five minutes past ten on his watch. The chairman pointed out to him that it was already 20 minutes past ten on the wall clock. Plevako asked the chairman: “What time is it on your watch, Your Excellency?” The chairman looked and replied:
At my fifteen minutes past ten. Plevako turned to the prosecutor:
What about your watch, Mr. Prosecutor?
The prosecutor, clearly wanting to cause trouble for the defense attorney, replied with a malicious smile:
It's already twenty-five minutes past ten on my watch.
He could not know what trap Plevako had set for him and how much he, the prosecutor, helped the defense.
The judicial investigation ended very quickly. Witnesses confirmed that the defendant closed the shop 20 minutes late. The prosecutor asked to find the defendant guilty. The floor was given to Plevako. The speech lasted two minutes. He declared:
The defendant was actually 20 minutes late. But, gentlemen of the jury, she is an old woman, illiterate, and doesn’t know much about watches. You and I are literate and intelligent people. How are things going with your watches? When the wall clock shows 20 minutes, Mr. Chairman has 15 minutes, and Mr. Prosecutor’s clock has 25 minutes. Of course, Mr. Prosecutor has the most reliable watch. So my watch was 20 minutes slow, so I was 20 minutes late. And I always considered my watch to be very accurate, because I have a gold, Moser watch.
So if Mr. Chairman, according to the prosecutor’s watch, opened the hearing 15 minutes late, and the defense attorney arrived 20 minutes later, then how can you demand that an illiterate tradeswoman have a better watch and have a better understanding of time than the prosecutor and I?
The jury deliberated for one minute and acquitted the defendant.
"15 years of unfair reproaches"
One day Plevako received a case regarding the murder of his woman by a man. Plevako came to the trial as usual, calm and confident of success, and without any papers or cheat sheets. And so, when it was the turn of the defense, Plevako stood up and said:
The noise in the hall began to subside. Spit again:
Gentlemen of the jury!
There was dead silence in the hall. Lawyer again:
Gentlemen of the jury!
There was a slight rustle in the hall, but the speech did not begin. Again:
Gentlemen of the jury!
Here the dissatisfied roar of the people, who had been waiting for the long-awaited spectacle, echoed in the hall. And Plevako again:
Gentlemen of the jury!
At this point the audience exploded with indignation, perceiving everything as a mockery of the respectable audience. And from the podium again:
Gentlemen of the jury!
Something unimaginable began. The hall roared along with the judge, prosecutor and assessors. And finally Plevako raised his hand, calling on the people to calm down.
Well, gentlemen, you couldn’t stand even 15 minutes of my experiment. What was it like for this unfortunate man to listen to 15 years of unfair reproaches and the irritated nagging of his grumpy woman over every insignificant trifle?!
The audience froze, then burst into delighted applause.
The man was acquitted.
"Absolution of Sins"
He once defended an elderly priest accused of adultery and theft. By all appearances, the defendant could not count on the favor of the jury. The prosecutor convincingly described the depth of the fall of the clergyman, mired in sins. Finally, Plevako rose from his place. His speech was brief: “Gentlemen of the jury! The matter is clear. The prosecutor is absolutely right in everything. The defendant committed all these crimes and confessed to them. What is there to argue about? But I draw your attention to this. A man sits in front of you who has absolved you of your sins in confession for thirty years. Now he is waiting from you: will you forgive him his sin?”
There is no need to clarify that the priest was acquitted.
"30 kopecks"
The court is considering the case of an old woman, a hereditary honorary citizen, who stole a tin teapot worth 30 kopecks. The prosecutor, knowing that Plevako would defend her, decided to cut the ground from under his feet, and he himself depicted to the jury hard life the client who forced her to take such a step. The prosecutor even emphasized that the criminal evokes pity, not indignation. But, gentlemen, private property sacred, the world order is based on this principle, so if you justify this grandmother, then logically you should justify the revolutionaries too. The jury nodded their heads in agreement, and then Plevako began his speech. He said: “Russia has had to endure many troubles, many trials over more than a thousand years of existence. The Pechenegs tormented her, the Polovtsians, the Tatars, the Poles. Twelve tongues attacked her and took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, and only grew stronger and stronger from the trials. But now... The old lady stole an old teapot worth 30 kopecks. Russia, of course, cannot stand this; it will perish irrevocably..."
The old woman was acquitted.
“I took off my shoes!”
In addition to the story about famous lawyer Gobber. He defends a man who has been accused of rape by a prostitute and is trying to get a significant amount from him in court for the injury he caused. Facts of the case: the plaintiff claims that the defendant lured her to a hotel room and raped her there. The man declares that everything was by good agreement. The last word for Plevako.
“Gentlemen of the jury,” he declares. “If you sentence my client to a fine, then I ask you to deduct from this amount the cost of washing the sheets that the plaintiff soiled with her shoes.”
The prostitute jumps up and shouts: “It’s not true! I took off my shoes!!!”
There is laughter in the hall. The defendant is acquitted.
"The Omen"
To the great Russian lawyer F.N. Plevako is credited with frequently using the religious mood of jurors in the interests of clients. Once, speaking in a provincial district court, he agreed with the bell ringer of the local church that he would begin ringing the gospel for mass with special accuracy.
The speech of the famous lawyer lasted several hours, and at the end F.N. Plevako exclaimed: If my client is innocent, the Lord will give a sign about it!
And then the bells rang. The jurors crossed themselves. The meeting lasted several minutes, and the foreman announced a not guilty verdict.
The Gruzinsky case.
This case was considered by the Ostrogozhsky District Court on September 29-30, 1883. Prince G.I. Gruzinsky was accused of the premeditated murder of his children’s former tutor, who later managed the estate of Gruzinsky’s wife, E.F. Schmidt.
The preliminary investigation established the following. E.F. Schmidt, invited by Gruzinsky last. After Gruzinsky demanded that his wife end all relations as a tutor, very quickly became close to his wife with the tutor, and he himself was fired, the wife declared the impossibility of further living with Gruzinsky and demanded the allocation of part of the property belonging to her. Having settled in the estate allocated to her, she invited E.F. to join her as her manager. Schmidt. After the partition, Gruzinsky’s two children lived for some time with their mother in the same estate where Schmidt was the manager. Schmidt often used this to take revenge on Gruzinsky. The latter had limited opportunities for meetings with children; the children were told a lot of incriminating things about Gruzinsky. As a result, being constantly in a tense nervous state during meetings with Schmidt and with children, Gruzinsky killed Schmidt during one of these meetings, shooting him several times with a pistol.
Plevako, defending the defendant, very consistently proves the absence of intent in his actions and the need to qualify them as committed in a state of insanity. He focuses on the prince’s feelings at the time of the crime, his relationship with his wife, and his love for his children. He tells the story of the prince, about his meeting with the “clerk from the store”, about his relationship with the old princess, about how the prince took care of his wife and children. The eldest son was growing up, the prince was taking him to St. Petersburg, to school. There he falls ill with a fever. The prince experiences three attacks, during which he manages to return to Moscow - “Gently loving father, my husband wants to see his family."
“It was then that the prince, who had not yet left his bed, had to experience terrible grief. Once he hears - the sick are so sensitive - in the next room the conversation between Schmidt and his wife: they, apparently, are arguing; but their quarrel is so strange: as if they were scolding their own people, and not strangers, then again the speeches are peaceful..., uncomfortable... The prince gets up, gathers his strength..., walks when no one expected him, when they thought that he was chained to the bed... And so. , not good together...
The prince fainted and lay on the floor all night. Those caught fled, not even thinking of sending help to the sick person. The prince could not kill the enemy, destroy him, he was weak... He only accepted misfortune into an open heart so that he would never know separation from him."
Plevako claims that he would not yet have dared to accuse the princess and Schmidt, to condemn them to the prince’s sacrifice, if they had left, had not boasted of their love, had not insulted him, had not extorted money from him, that this “would have been the hypocrisy of the word.”
The princess lives in her half of the estate. Then she leaves, leaving the children with Schmidt. The prince is angry: he takes the children. But here something irreparable happens. “Schmidt, taking advantage of the fact that the children’s underwear is in the princess’s house where he lives, rejects the demand with an oath and sends an answer that without 300 rubles as a deposit he will not give the prince two shirts and two pants for the children. The hanger-on, the hired lover, stands between the father and children and dares to call him a man who is capable of wasting children's underwear, takes care of children and demands a deposit of 300 rubles from the father. Not only the father to whom this is said, but the stranger who hears about this, his hair stands on end!" The next morning the prince saw children in wrinkled shirts. “Father’s heart sank. He turned away from these talking eyes and - what fatherly love will not do - went out into the hallway, got into the carriage prepared for him for the trip and went ... went to ask his rival, enduring shame and humiliation, for a shirt for his children.” .
At night, according to witnesses, Schmidt loaded the guns. The prince had a pistol with him, but this was a habit, not an intention. “I affirm,” said Plevako, “that an ambush awaits him there. Linen, refusal, bail, loaded guns of large and small caliber - everything speaks for my thought.”
He goes to Schmidt. “Of course, his soul could not help but be indignant when he saw the nest of his enemies and began to approach it. Here it is - the place where, in the hours of his grief and suffering, they - his enemies - laugh and rejoice at his misfortune. Here it is - a lair where the honor of the family, his honor, and all the interests of his children were sacrificed to the animal voluptuousness of a scoundrel. Here it is - a place where not only was their present taken away from him, but their past happiness was also taken away, poisoning him with suspicions...
God forbid we experience such moments!
In this mood he drives, approaches the house, knocks on the door. door.
They won't let him in. The footman speaks of the order not to accept.
The prince conveys that he doesn’t need anything other than linen.
But instead of fulfilling his legal demand, instead of finally politely refusing, he hears abuse, abuse from the lips of his wife’s lover, directed at him, who does not do any insult on his part.
Have you heard about this swearing: “Let the scoundrel leave, don’t you dare knock, this is my house! Get out, I’ll shoot.”
The prince's whole being was indignant. The enemy stood close and laughed so brazenly. The prince could have known that he was armed from his family, who had heard from Tsybulin. And the prince could not help but believe that he was capable of everything evil.”
He shoots. “But listen, gentlemen,” says the defender, “was there a living place in his soul at that terrible moment?” “The prince could not cope with these feelings. They are too legal, these are for them” “The husband sees a man ready to desecrate the purity of the marriage bed; the father is present at the scene of the seduction of his daughter; the high priest sees the impending blasphemy - and, besides them, there is no one to save the right and a shrine. In their souls it is not a vicious feeling of malice that rises, but a righteous feeling of vengeance and defense of the violated right. It is legal, it is holy; if it did not rise, they are despicable people, pimps, sacrileges! "
Concluding his speech, Fyodor Nikiforovich said: “Oh, how happy I would be if, having measured and compared with your own understanding the strength of his patience and struggle with himself, and the force of oppression over him of the soul-disturbing pictures of his family misfortune, you admitted that he cannot be charged with the charges brought against him, and his defender is entirely to blame for his insufficient ability to carry out the task he has taken upon himself...”
The jury returned a not guilty verdict, finding that the crime was committed in a state of insanity.
"Begin!"
From the memories of Plevako... Once a rich Moscow merchant turned to him for help. Plevako says: “I heard about this merchant. I decided that I would charge such a fee that the merchant would be horrified. But not only was he not surprised, but he also said:
Just win my case. I’ll pay what you said, and I’ll also give you pleasure.
What kind of pleasure?
Win the case, you'll see.
I won the case. The merchant paid the fee. I reminded him of the promised pleasure. The merchant says:
On Sunday, around ten in the morning, I’ll pick you up and let’s go.
Where to this early?
Look, you'll see.
It's Sunday. The merchant came to pick me up. We are going to Zamoskvorechye. I wonder where he's taking me. There are no restaurants here, no gypsies. And the time is not right for these things. We drove down some side streets. There are no residential buildings around, only barns and warehouses. We arrived at some warehouse. A little man is standing at the gate. Either a watchman or a team worker. They got off.
Kupchina asks the man:
That's right, your lordship.
We walk through the yard. The little man opened a door. We walked in, looked and didn’t understand anything. A huge room, shelves along the walls, dishes on the shelves.
The merchant sent the peasant out, stripped off his fur coat and offered to take it off for me. I undress. The merchant went to the corner, took two hefty clubs, gave one of them to me and said:
Get started.
So what to start?
Like what? Break the dishes!
Why hit her? - The merchant smiled.
Start, you’ll understand why... - The merchant walked up to the shelves and with one blow broke a bunch of dishes. I hit too. Broke it too. We began to break the dishes and, imagine, I went into such a rage and began to smash the dishes with such fury with a club that I’m ashamed to even remember. Imagine that I really experienced some kind of wild but acute pleasure and could not calm down until the merchant and I broke everything down to the last cup. When it was all over, the merchant asked me:
Well, did you enjoy it?
I had to admit that I received it."
All rights reserved © A. Yu. Kozhemyakin, 2007-2018.
Defense and representation in criminal cases; representation of interests in civil disputes and arbitration. Credit disputes. Tax disputes. Corporate disputes. Land disputes. Consultations. Drafting of documents.
Website website is not a means mass media; the author is not responsible for evaluative publications, including comments left by third parties. Information published on the site cannot be used as evidence in legal proceedings.
[30 kopecks]
The court is considering the case of an old woman, a hereditary honorary citizen, who stole a tin teapot worth 30 kopecks. The prosecutor, knowing that Plevako would defend her, decided to cut the ground from under his feet, and he himself described to the jury the difficult life of her client, which forced her to take such a step. The prosecutor even emphasized that the criminal evokes pity, not indignation. But, gentlemen, private property is sacred, the world order is based on this principle, so if you justify this grandmother, then logically you must justify the revolutionaries too. The jury nodded their heads in agreement, and then Plevako began his speech. He said: “Russia has had to endure many troubles, many trials over more than a thousand years of existence. The Pechenegs tormented her, the Polovtsians, the Tatars, the Poles. Twelve tongues attacked her and took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, and only grew stronger and stronger from the trials. But now... The old lady stole an old teapot worth 30 kopecks. Russia, of course, cannot stand this; it will perish irrevocably..."
[I took off my shoes! ]
In addition to the story about the famous lawyer Plevako. He defends a man who has been accused of rape by a prostitute and is trying to get a significant amount from him in court for the injury he caused. Facts of the case: the plaintiff claims that the defendant lured her to a hotel room and raped her there. The man declares that everything was by good agreement. The last word goes to Plevako.
“Gentlemen of the jury,” he declares. “If you sentence my client to a fine, then I ask you to deduct from this amount the cost of washing the sheets that the plaintiff soiled with her shoes.”
The prostitute jumps up and shouts: “It’s not true! I took off my shoes!!!”
There is laughter in the hall. The defendant is acquitted.
[Absolution of sins]
He once defended an elderly priest accused of adultery and theft. By all appearances, the defendant could not count on the favor of the jury. The prosecutor convincingly described the depth of the fall of the clergyman, mired in sins. Finally, Plevako rose from his place. His speech was brief: “Gentlemen of the jury! The matter is clear. The prosecutor is absolutely right in everything. The defendant committed all these crimes and confessed to them. What is there to argue about? But I draw your attention to this. A man sits in front of you who has absolved you of your sins in confession for thirty years. Now he is waiting from you: will you forgive him his sin?” There is no need to clarify that the priest was acquitted.
[ 20 minutes. ]
Lawyer F.N. Plevako’s defense of the owner of a small shop, a semi-literate woman, who violated the rules on trading hours and closed the trade 20 minutes later than expected, on the eve of some religious holiday, is very well known. The court hearing in her case was scheduled for 10 o'clock. The court left 10 minutes late. Everyone was present, except for the defender - Plevako. The chairman of the court ordered to find Plevako. About 10 minutes later, Plevako slowly entered the hall, calmly sat down in the place of protection and opened his briefcase. The chairman of the court reprimanded him for being late. Then Plevako pulled out his watch, looked at it and stated that it was only five minutes past ten on his watch. The chairman pointed out to him that it was already 20 minutes past ten on the wall clock. Plevako asked the chairman: “What time is it on your watch, Your Excellency?” The chairman looked and replied:
- At my fifteen minutes past ten. Plevako turned to the prosecutor:
- What about your watch, Mr. Prosecutor? The prosecutor, clearly wanting to cause trouble for the defense attorney, replied with a malicious smile:
- It’s already twenty-five minutes past ten on my watch.
He could not know what trap Plevako had set for him and how much he, the prosecutor, helped the defense.
The judicial investigation ended very quickly. Witnesses confirmed that the defendant closed the shop 20 minutes late. The prosecutor asked to find the defendant guilty. The floor was given to Plevako. The speech lasted two minutes. He declared:
- The defendant was really 20 minutes late. But, gentlemen of the jury, she is an old woman, illiterate, and doesn’t know much about watches. You and I are literate and intelligent people. How are things going with your watches? When the wall clock shows 20 minutes, Mr. Chairman has 15 minutes, and Mr. Prosecutor’s clock has 25 minutes. Of course, Mr. Prosecutor has the most reliable watch. So my watch was 20 minutes slow, so I was 20 minutes late. And I always considered my watch to be very accurate, because I have a gold, Moser watch.
So if Mr. Chairman, according to the prosecutor’s watch, opened the hearing 15 minutes late, and the defense attorney arrived 20 minutes later, then how can you demand that an illiterate tradeswoman have a better watch and have a better understanding of time than the prosecutor and I?
The jury deliberated for one minute and acquitted the defendant.
[ 15 years of unfair reproach. ]
There was in Russia, even in ancient times, the famous lawyer Plevako, who won almost all lawsuits. And then one day a case came to him regarding the murder of his woman by a man. Plevako came to the trial as usual, calm and confident of success, and without any papers or cheat sheets. And so, when it was the turn of the defense, Plevako stood up and said:
The noise in the hall began to subside. Spit again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
There was dead silence in the hall. Lawyer again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
There was a slight rustle in the hall, but the speech did not begin. Again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
Here the dissatisfied roar of the people, who had been waiting for the long-awaited spectacle, echoed in the hall. And Plevako again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
At this point the audience exploded with indignation, perceiving everything as a mockery of the respectable audience. And from the podium again:
- Gentlemen of the jury!
Something unimaginable began. The hall roared along with the judge, prosecutor and assessors. And finally Plevako raised his hand, calling on the people to calm down.
- Well, gentlemen, you couldn’t stand even 15 minutes of my experiment.
What was it like for this unfortunate man to listen to 15 years of unfair reproaches and the irritated nagging of his grumpy woman over every insignificant trifle?!
The audience froze, then burst into delighted applause.
The man was acquitted.
Loading...
