Testimony and Footage Presented in Ongoing Sherzat Polat Homicide Trial

On May 15, during the court hearing on the killing of Sherzat Polat, a video was presented showing the final moments of the 16-year-old’s life, Orda.kz reports.

From The Beginning

From the very start of the hearings, the defense attorneys pointed to numerous violations committed during the pre-trial investigation. According to them, the juvenile suspects were not informed of their rights, were not provided with procedural documents, and the interrogations themselves were conducted in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code.

On these grounds, the defense requested that the testimonies be declared invalid and the case materials be returned for further investigation. Judge Zhanuzakov rejected the motion, stating that no violations were found in the case materials.

The court also addressed the issue of the unauthorized video recording of Sherzat's Uncle, Nurganat Gaipbayev. It was revealed that Medet Adilzhanov, acting head of the Talgar criminal police, had recorded the interrogation on his phone without authorization or a formal protocol.

Video Footage from The Night

The court once again reviewed key video recordings from the day of the incident. According to the prosecution, this footage supports the guilt of some of the defendants and contradicts the testimony of certain witnesses.

The video is said to help identify false statements and establish the timeline of the conflict.

The footage shows Sherzat Polat attempting to escape before being caught by a group, thrown to the ground, and assaulted, including blows to the head. As he tried to get up, he was knocked down again and attacked further.

The video also shows Polat’s relatives trying to reach him, but the group turned on them as well, attacking them with various objects.

Suspect Darkhan Askentay was asked to identify himself in the video. He responded that the footage was taken from a distance and he could not say for sure, adding:

The defendant was also questioned about his motives and actions on the night of the incident. 

A Tense Exchange

Later, defendant Nurbol Toktaubayev was questioned.

Toktaubayev again retracted his earlier statements, claiming they were made under pressure. He stated that officers and investigators beat both him and his younger brother.

According to Toktaubayev, he never referred to himself as a member of the "95 Khutor" group, and the phrases attributed to him are not present in the case materials.

Karzhaubay said: ‘Come outside with me.’ Then: ‘If not with me, then with my son.’ First he says his son hit him. Then — that he pulled a knife. I never said anything like that. I was born in 1996, have no prior convictions. There were no words like ‘you’ll pay with your health.’ They wanted to cover it all up, he said.

When asked by Judge Yerzhan Zhanuzakov whether he believed it was right to kick Nurganat Gayepbayev, Sherzat’s uncle, Toktaubaev replied:

To clarify, the judge asked:

The judge then asked a final question:

The defendant could not answer.

Scrutiny

Attention in court also turned to Sanat Abdykady­r, a witness whose testimony closely matched the previously published speech of a person known as “Chika.”

This sparked speculation on social media suggesting that Abdykady­r and “Chika” are the same person. In an interview with Orda.kz, Sanat denied any connection to the events.

Previous hearings have revealed conflicting details. One of the defendants, Darkhan Askentay, stated for the first time that Sherzat had struck him with brass knuckles — something he had not mentioned during the investigation. 

The defense accused Prosecutor Dana Sarsenbay of bias, but the court rejected the motion for recusal.

Statements from the victim’s family continue to be presented. Sherzat’s mother, Gulbara Bishimbieva, testified that during the attack, two men restrained her, someone threw stones at her, and one of the attackers had a weapon.

Sherzat’s grandmother, Zhumabike Kadyrova, also gave testimony. She had recorded the incident on her phone, and her status in the case may change due to contradictions between her account and those of other witnesses.

A Warning

Before the proceedings resumed earlier today, Judge Zhanuzakov also addressed the media and bloggers, urging them not to spread misinformation. 

He emphasized that some bloggers uninvolved in the case have been making subjective claims about the investigation.

According to Article 75 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the administration of justice belongs exclusively to the courts. Interference in this process is unacceptable and carries consequences. Until a verdict is issued, it is inappropriate to give legal assessments of the case. The arguments of both the prosecution and the defense must be examined. The judge must remain independent, objective, impartial, and free from outside influence. The court functions as an impartial arbiter guided by the law,
Zhanuzakov stated. 

He urged restraint in public commentary until a verdict is delivered.

We call on bloggers and other social media users to refrain from provocative actions. We guarantee that the court will deliver an objective and well-founded verdict,
 he concluded.

Original Authors: Kumysay Sarbasova, Aliya Askarova, telegram post

This article may be updated with further details