Troika Material
Between 26 April and 6 May 1941, the Military Tribunal of Kiev Military District met in the building of the Vinnitsa Oblast NKVD administration to try Korablev, Zaputriaev, and Shirin.
The Tribunal heard the indictment and also witness testimony from former victims, B. Epel’baum, P. Iur’ev (the Secretary of the Vinnitsa Oblast Party Committee), and others. They recounted tortures and humiliation at the hands of Maistruk, Reshetilo, Nadezhdin, Zaputriaev, Shirin, and Reder, among others. At NKVD operational meetings, NKVD operatives who produced the largest number of arrests were labeled “shock-workers” and celebrated. They spoke of the “laboratories” in which mass interrogations and beatings of detainees were conducted. Reder and others beat detainees and forced them to beat each other with a chair leg or rubber hose. They forced detainees to imitate sex acts with the bodies of citizens who had already been shot. This inhumanity, contempt for others, brutality, and collapse of morality among Chekists was reflected in the popular slang term “troika material [troechnyi material].” This was what they called prisoners doomed to be shot, people already not considered to be human.Speaking before the court, Korablev did not acknowledge guilt; Zaputriaev and Shirin did so, but only in part. Korablev declared that the decrees of Ezhov and Uspenskii amounted to one thing: “Lock ’em up, lock ’em up.” He interpreted these as orders of the Central Committee of the Communist Party: “I was convinced that I was executing serious party business, and had no hesitations... I am of the same mind now, that I am not guilty of conscious disgraces [bezobraziia] within the NKVD administration.” The former chief denied the gravity of the accusation that thirty people had died in prison. In his view, this was a low number relative to the more than six thousand arrested.
This criminal, for whom human life had no value, firmly declared: “I have worked in the organs in Vinnitsa for a long time, but nowhere and never have I been accused of violating socialist legality. I and many others are victims of the criminal activity of the former treasonous leadership.” Along with Zaputriaev, Korablev called attention to his working-class background, even though he had born into a peasant family. This was supposed to confirm that they were not class enemies, but “svoi [one of their own],” persons loyal to the Communist Party who had countenanced miscalculations on account of inexperience and the conditions created by “treasonous leadership.” Zaputriaev also attempted to project the appearance of a terminally ill person, while Shirin deflected blame to others.The Tribunal sentenced Korablev and Zaputriaev to be shot and opted for a continuation of the case against Shirin. Orders were issued to carry out an investigation of their co-workers who had participated in the “violations.”54 On 24 June, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR examined the appeal (kassatsionnaia zhaloba) of Korablev and Zaputriaev, regarding their 6 May 1941 death sentences. The Supreme Court commuted their sentence to ten years of imprisonment with the forfeiture of their titles.55 On 17 September 1941, the Senior Investigator of the Ukrainian republic NKVD, M. Gubenko, examined the case of Prishivtsyn, Shirin, Danileiko, Maistruk, and Butenko. He found that these individuals had been summoned before the court as witnesses, but in the course of the trial there “arose” mutually contradictory and unproven accusations from witnesses. In Gubenko’s view, Prishivtsyn, as Deputy Chief of the Vinnitsa UNKVD, did not beat anyone, did not carry out mass arrests, and concerned himself solely with the conclusion of cases that had already been opened. Furthermore, the final authority regarding arrests was held by the head of the oblast NKVD administration and the Oblast Procurator.56
Another individual in this case, Butenko, who since being fired from the NKVD organs became a director of the Timber Agency in Vinnitsa, was accused of the groundless arrest of citizens based only on arrest lists.
Subsequent to the decision of the court, however, he was not questioned in connection with the accusations against him, but only as a witness in Korablev’s case. The investigator concluded on this basis that the actions of the accused did not lead to serious consequences, that the testimony of witnesses was incorrect or dubious, and that attempting to substantiate them was not possible. Taking all factors into account, the investigator ordered the case closed; the head of the Ukrainian republic NKVD Investigatory Group, Lesnoi, agreed.57V. Maistruk continued his service as the Deputy Chair of the Voroshilovgrad UNKVD. The fate of Danileiko, fired from the NVKD in September 1939, is unknown. Shirin was freed on 17 September 1941 due to the failure to prove his crime. In 1942, he returned to work in the NKVD. From 12 August 1943, he was the head of the Chekist-operational sector of the Administration for Prisoners of War within the NKVD. From 9 May 1943, he was Lieutenant Colonel of State Security.58 A significant number of employees within the Vinnitsa UNKVD who took part in the mass repressions of 1937 and 1938 were fired from the NKVD during the first half of 1939. That was the full extent of their punishment.