Content |
Owners
History
2025: Chief pathologist of a hospital in the Urals received 8 years in prison for bribes
At the end of January 2025, the Krasnoturyinsky City Court of the Sverdlovsk Region sentenced to 8 years in a general regime colony the former head of the pathological and anatomical department of the city hospital for taking bribes and extortion in 2024.
According to MKRU Ekaterenburg, in the period from March to May 2024, the doctor extorted bribes from morgue employees for the opportunity to receive additional income from ritual organizations for services in pre-defense training of bodies.
The investigation established that the accused received ₽66,5 thousand from the first orderly for inaction and general patronage in the service. From the second orderly, he demanded ₽2 thousand for similar services. ₽60 thousand extorted from a third employee under the threat of murder.
The court found the pathologist guilty of receiving a bribe in a significant amount by an official with extortion under paragraph "b" of part 5 of article 290 of the Criminal Code of Russia. He was also charged with articles for petty bribery and extortion.
The court sentenced the guilty person to 8 years in prison with serving in a general regime correctional colony, according to the official telegram channel of the prosecutor's office of the Sverdlovsk region. |
In addition to the main punishment, the convict was fined ₽1,3 million. He is also deprived of the right to hold positions in local self-government bodies and state bodies and institutions related to the implementation of administrative, economic and organizational and administrative functions for a period of 5 years.
The prosecutor's office of the Sverdlovsk region stressed that all episodes of criminal activity were fully proven during the investigation and trial. The verdict will enter into legal force in 10 days if it is not appealed by the parties.
The criminal case was investigated during operational escort of employees of the regional department of the FSB of Russia in the Sverdlovsk region.[1]
2021: Payment of 300 thousand rubles compensation to a woman in labor for electric shock from medical equipment
On April 21, 2021, the Sverdlovsk Regional Court announced that it had recovered 300 thousand rubles of moral compensation from the Krasnoturyinsky City Hospital in favor of the mother of a newborn child, who was electrocuted in the city maternity hospital.
According to the press service of the court, in the spring of 2020, when Ekaterina L. (the surname is not called) was in the Krasnoturyinsky maternity hospital, her newborn child needed phototherapy. At the time of prescribing the treatment, only one irradiator lamp of the two required was free. They promised to give the second after the discharge of the neighbor in the ward. When the device was released, Catherine decided to move it herself to the crib of the child and turn on the equipment. She simultaneously touched both working lamps, which is why she received an electric shock. The woman fell and hit her back, received burns, and also had heart rhythm problems.
She was urgently placed in the intensive care unit, and then in the cardiology department. The young mother was forced to be separate from her child, which is why the newborn was transferred to artificial feeding.
Ekaterina L. appealed to the Severouralsky City Court with a civil lawsuit against the Krasnoturyinsky maternity hospital, GAUZ SO "Krasnoturyinsky City Hospital" and the Ministry of Health of the Sverdlovsk Region. She asked to jointly recover from the defendants compensation for moral damage in the amount of 1 million rubles, the press service of the Sverdlovsk Regional Court reports.
The hospital appealed the decision to the Sverdlovsk Regional Court, but the court dismissed the complaint.
Phototherapy lamps are a medical device, and only specially trained medical personnel are allowed to work with them. At the same time, hospital employees are prohibited from leaving patients unattended when conducting procedures using electrical medical equipment. However, the lamps were in the ward in the patient's free access, the regional court concluded.[2] |
Notes
![]() | The site content is translated by machine translation software powered by PROMT. The machine-translated articles are not always perfect and may contain errors in vocabulary, syntax or grammar. Read original article If you find inaccuracies or errors in the results of machine translation, please write to editor@tadviser.ru. We will make every effort to correct them as soon as possible. |