In Odessa, a former police officer pleaded guilty to making pro-Russian statements

A court in Odesa refused to approve a plea agreement between the prosecutor’s office and a former police officer accused of justifying Russian aggression. Although the man pleaded guilty and agreed to donate funds to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the court deemed the proposed sentence too lenient.

This was reported by Intent, citing a ruling by the Primorsky District Court of Odessa.

According to the investigation, between January and March 2025, the law enforcement officer repeatedly expressed pro-Russian views during conversations with a colleague in his office. The investigation established that he disseminated claims that essentially echoed key narratives of Russian propaganda.

In particular, the defendant claimed that Ukraine had allegedly already lost the war and that a freeze in the conflict would occur in the near future. In one of the conversations, he stated: “That’s it, the war is lost, let’s admit it right away,” and also expressed the conviction that Ukraine had already suffered a territorial defeat.

A separate set of his statements concerned the occupied territories. The police officer told his interlocutor that the so-called DNR and LNR had supposedly legally become part of Russia through the procedure of recognizing them as “independent states.” He argued that residents of the occupied regions had already received Russian passports, and he effectively presented the occupation as a natural process.

In addition, the defendant justified the reasons for the Russian invasion. In his remarks, he attributed the aggression to the Kremlin’s fears regarding Ukraine’s potential accession to NATO and the deployment of foreign military bases. He also called Ukraine “an aggressive state toward Russia” and claimed that hostilities were taking place over territories that the aggressor country considers its own due to the presence of a Russian-speaking population there.

The investigation also documented his statements regarding mobilization. The man favorably compared service in the Russian army to mobilization in Ukraine, emphasizing the monetary payments under contract and the absence of coercion. The court regarded such statements as justifying the actions of the aggressor state.

Separately, the case file includes his claims that the Azov Battalion is “the most Nazi unit in Ukraine,” as well as predictions regarding the Russian Federation’s future seizure of the Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Kherson regions.

In May 2026, a plea agreement was reached between the prosecutor and the defendant. The man fully admitted his guilt, expressed remorse, and agreed to cooperate with the investigation. The parties asked the court to impose a probationary period.

The defendant also agreed to transfer 120,000 hryvnias to the Ukrainian Armed Forces upon the return of his bail. Additionally, he had already been dismissed from the police force.

However, the court concluded that the proposed punishment did not serve the public interest. In the court’s view, the dissemination of pro-Russian narratives by a law enforcement officer undermines the authority of the National Police and contradicts the duties of a police officer.

As a result, the court refused to approve the plea agreement. His sentence will be determined during further court proceedings.

Also in Odesa, a man who promoted Kremlin narratives through the courts was sentenced to five years in prison. He openly repeated Russian propaganda claims—calling the war a “special operation,” denying Russia’s status as an aggressor state, and speaking of a “world government” and the “Club of Rome.”

Анна Бальчінос