Law enforcement agencies were twice able to isolate the vicious and dangerous teenager from society, but he remained neglected and committed a savage murder Photo from the site murders.ru
Arkady Neyland committed a double murder in Leningrad the day before his 15th birthday - January 27, 1964. He celebrated his birthday on the way to Moscow, where he left by train a few hours after the brutal massacre of a woman and her young son. In the capital, he bought a train ticket to Sukhumi, and while waiting for the train to depart, he toured the city on a tour bus. In a word, he behaved like a Soviet schoolboy from the provinces who was heading through Moscow to the All-Union Pioneer Camp "Artek".
On January 30, on the platform of the Sukhumi railway station, Neyland was detained by local operatives, who identified him from a reference received from Leningrad. It took four days to uncover the bloody crime, rumors of which instantly spread throughout the northern capital...
The future killer was registered in the children's room of the police when he was not yet 12 years old
Family - mother younger sister Arkadia, her stepfather and his two sons from his first marriage, huddled in one room of a communal apartment. The head of the Neyland family worked as a mechanic at an enterprise, his wife worked as a hospital nurse. Their more than modest earnings did not provide enough income in the house. In addition, both spouses drank.
The conditions and lifestyle of the Neylands were not something exceptional for the USSR in the 60s. In the same Leningrad, tens of thousands of people lived in densely populated communal apartments, counting pennies until they got paid or “intercepted” advance payments from friends. Many families with children were single-parent or consisted of a mother and stepfather or father and stepmother. The image of a dysfunctional family usually ended with drinking parents who were not involved in raising children.
Arkady grew up without parental supervision, and by the age of 12, the young thief and hooligan was registered in the children's room of the police department of the Zhdanovsky (now Primorsky) district of the city.
A slight digression here suggests itself...
Juvenile technologies in Soviet style
In the summer of 2010, draft federal laws were submitted to the State Duma of the Russian Federation, which allow, in particular, to deprive parental rights or limit them because of “poverty” or “inappropriate” upbringing. The bills were received ambiguously in society. There were many supporters of taking repressive measures against “negligent” parents. Opponents of total state intervention in the internal life of the family objected - if the family is dysfunctional, it is necessary not to destroy it, but, first of all, to help get out of a difficult situation. ("Pravo.Ru" conducted a survey on this matter, which can be found ).
Returning to the Neyland family, we can trace how forty years ago the state, represented by the executive authorities and law enforcement agencies of the Zhdanovsky district, the school where Arkady Neyland studied, responded to the situation in a dysfunctional family.
Let's start with the housing issue. For many years, not only was it not resolved, but it finally reached a dead end - in 1963, one of Arkady’s half-brothers got married and brought his wife under his father’s roof. Thus, two married couples and three teenagers of different sexes lived in one room. And hopes for improvement in the foreseeable future living conditions there wasn't.
As they say, I washed my hands and high school, from which Arkady was expelled after 5th grade for chronic poor academic performance, theft and hooliganism. The authorities sent him to a boarding school in the city of Pushkin. But even in this government institution for “difficult teenagers,” Neyland, as they say, did not fit in. Several times his fellow students gave him a “dark” punishment for stealing from others. In addition, Arkady suffered from enuresis, for which he was subjected to ridicule and bullying from others. Here is what the management of boarding school No. 67 provided to the court against Arkady Neiman in 1964: “... showed himself to be a poorly trained student, although he was not a stupid and capable child... The students did not like him and beat him. He was caught in thefts more than once boarding school students have money and things."
According to some sources, a teenager ran away from the boarding school and was detained by the police in Moscow, according to others, the boarding school management insisted that the parents take Arkady. It is only known that after this the authorities employed Neyland as an auxiliary worker at the Lenpischemash Production Association, where he somehow held out until the end of 1963.
During this period, Arkady twice attempted robbery on lonely passers-by for the purpose of robbery, and committed thefts from the Soyuzpechat kiosk, a bathhouse, a service center and several hairdressing salons. All of them were revealed, and the district prosecutor's office opened a criminal case against the teenager. However, it did not reach the court: the prosecutor’s office took into account the “sincere repentance and age” of the defendant, and the case was closed.
But less than a month has passed since Arkady Neyland again became a defendant in a criminal case - this time for residential theft.
How Neiland escaped from the district prosecutor's office
On January 24, 1964, Neiland and his friend Kubarev, under the pretext of collecting waste paper, called apartments in one of the entrances of building No. 3 on Sestroretskaya Street. Having made sure that there were no residents in one of them, they picked up the keys and hastily tied up the things that seemed most valuable to them. However, when they went outside, the janitor, seeing unfamiliar teenagers with bundles, raised the alarm. The novice burglars were detained by passers-by.
They were interrogated at the Zhdanovsky district prosecutor's office. Due to the obvious oversight of the assistant prosecutor, who sent Neumann into the corridor during Kubarev’s interrogation, the latter managed to leave the prosecutor’s office building without hindrance.
There were three days left before the bloody crime that shook the city was committed.
Breakfast on Sestroretskaya with corpses in the background
All this time, Arkady Neyland was hiding in the basements. Early in the morning of January 27, he appeared at home for a few minutes, where he took an ax. This indicated that the 14-year-old was ready to cross the final line.
He had identified the apartment that Neiland intended to rob on the day when he and Kubarev were “collecting waste paper” in a house on Sestroretskaya and were caught stealing. First of all, he was attracted then front door, upholstered in leather. When the hostess, 37-year-old Larisa Kupriyanova, let the teenagers into the hallway, Arkady managed to see a color TV turned on in the room, which he had only heard about before. Neyland also noticed that the hostess had a gold crown. He also saw a three-year-old child. But this did not affect his plan in any way...
On the morning of January 27, Arkady Neyland introduced himself as a postman through the closed door to the Kupriyanovs’ apartment. And right from the doorway he attacked the hostess with an ax.
Seeing an ax in the teenager’s hands, Kupriyanova tried to take it away. Therefore, the first blows fell on the woman’s arms and shoulders. In total, the forensic medical examination counted about 15 wounds, 5 of which were fatal. He struck little Georgiy 6 times “to keep him from spinning under his feet,” as he will explain during the investigation.
After searching the apartment, Neiland found a wallet with 54 rubles, three-percent loan bonds, gold women's jewelry, and a Zorkiy camera. For some reason I took the passport of the husband of the murdered woman and her daughter from her first marriage. The camera turned out to be loaded with film, and Neiland, exposing the legs of his victim, took several obscene photographs, which, according to his explanation, he intended to sell under the guise of pornography.
After that, Neyland washed his hands in the bathroom, fried some eggs in the kitchen, and calmly had breakfast. Before leaving, he set the apartment on fire and turned on the gas, hoping that the fire and gas explosion would destroy all traces of the crime. However, neighbors on the landing, sensing the smell of burning, called the firefighters. The crew arrived promptly, and the crime scene was almost unaffected by fire.
Thanks to this, the investigative team found bloody fingerprints on the wardrobe, and the murder weapon - an ax with a burnt ax. After interviewing dozens of residents of the house about the appearance of unfamiliar persons here, a verbal portrait Neilanda.
The description of the residents - "a lanky, big-lipped teenager of about 15-16 years old" - was all too familiar to both the district police department and the prosecutor's office. So Neiland came under suspicion. When investigators established that he had taken an ax from his apartment, this version became the main one. Kubarev, Neiland's accomplice in the theft from an apartment in the same building, was immediately interrogated. He said that his friend planned to return to Sestroretskaya to “make money” in apartment No. 9, and leave for Sukhumi or Tbilisi.
Orientations were urgently sent to these cities, as well as to Moscow...
The voice of the people, demanding the execution of a minor from below, was clearly organized from above
As soon as Neyland was detained in Sukhumi, several operatives from Leningrad flew there. On the spot, it turned out that their Abkhaz colleagues searched the detainee poorly, and he managed to hide several important pieces of evidence in the cell - a wallet, the passport of the murdered woman’s husband, the keys to the Kupreevs’ apartment and a bunch of thieves’ master keys. The investigation also found a camera stolen from the apartment. Dried blood stains were found on Neyland's clothing, which were later identified as Kupriyanova's blood type.
During interrogations in Leningrad, Arkady Neyland calmly, without a trace of remorse, spoke about the details of the crime he committed. It was obvious: Neiland had already been enlightened by the inmates of the pre-trial detention center that age would reliably protect him from severe punishment.
Meanwhile, a brutal double murder committed by a teenager received wide publicity. Letters from citizens and organizations began to arrive from all over the country, addressed to the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Leonid Brezhnev, with requests to adopt a law on the application of capital punishment to minors who have committed particularly serious crimes. And the initiative group of Leningraders, in turn, began collecting signatures for a petition demanding “to destroy the degenerate.”
The voice of the people was heard above. Although subsequent events indicate that, most likely, the letters and petitions were organized on orders from above: the increase in crime, including juvenile crime, which began in the 60s of the last century, worried the party and Soviet leadership, and Neyland was elected as a "whipping boy".
On February 17, 1964, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, contrary to legal rules and customs, adopted a resolution allowing the use of capital punishment - execution - against minors. But what to do with the fact that the law is not retroactive?
The final punishment is death. The sentence was carried out 5 months after the trial
In Leningrad, a written survey was conducted among the city's judges - can the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council be considered retroactive? The organizers of the action had planned a positive response in advance.
The consideration of the case on the merits took place on March 23, 1964 in a closed trial. Considering the great public danger of the crime committed - murder under aggravating circumstances, as well as the personality of Neyland and "guided by the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of February 17, 1964 No. 2234", the court, based on the totality of the crimes committed, made a final decision: sentenced to death - to shot.
The verdict was generally received with satisfaction in the country. However, it caused a negative reaction among lawyers and part of the intelligentsia. Abroad, the Neyland case was unequivocally commented on as an example of the Soviet Union's non-compliance with international law and relevant agreements.
Arkady Neyland's cassation appeal was left unsatisfied, and the Supreme Soviet of the USSR rejected the petition for pardon. On August 11, 1964, the sentence was carried out.
In preparing the publication, materials and photographs from the site murders.ru were partially used
Running along a crooked path
Arkasha was unlucky. He was born, let's say, into a dysfunctional family. Parents - Latvians by origin - were ordinary hard workers in Leningrad. His father worked as a mechanic at one of the local enterprises, his mother worked as a nurse. A completely ordinary Soviet family, if not for one “but”. Both loved to kiss the bottle, and then to their children. The boy was constantly beaten, and there was often nothing to eat in the house. Because of this, he ran away and wandered.
Arkady was born into a dysfunctional family
Already at the age of seven, Arkasha was registered in the children's room of the police. He found it difficult to get along with people because of his aggression and feelings of envy towards other, prosperous children. When the boy was twelve years old, his mother hastened to get rid of him and sent him to a boarding school. But it didn’t work out here either. Constant conflicts with peers forced Arkasha to run away. But instead of home, he decided to go to Moscow. The capital's “tour” turned out to be short-lived. The police detained the teenager and returned him to Leningrad.
Arkady Neyland
Arkady had a chance to change his life. He got a job at the Lenpishmash enterprise. It would seem that you study, work and dream together with everyone about a happy communist future. But no, Arkasha was not one of those “simpletons”. He constantly skipped work, took everything that was bad from there and, of course, had conflicts with all the people around him.
By 1963, the fourteen-year-old teenager had numerous arrests with the police due to theft and hooliganism. But the Soviet Themis endured. At the end of January 1964, he was caught again for theft. Arkady managed to escape from custody and planned a “terrible murder.” He understood that petty theft was nothing. He needed one big and solid business that could provide him with funds for several years.
Neiland dreamed of settling in Sukhumi
Arkady decided that “to start new life» best in Sukhimi. And on January 27, the day before his fifteenth birthday, he went to turn his dream into reality. And as a " magic wand"The teenager took the ax.
Postman Pechkin
Neiland chose the victim who would give him a happy future by chance. He wanted to rob a rich apartment. In his opinion, wealth could be determined by the condition of the front door. In Leningrad, in house No. 3 on Sestroretskaya Street, Arkady liked apartment No. 9. The fact is that its front door was upholstered in leather. The teenager decided to act.
The victim's apartment
He rang the doorbell and introduced himself as a postal worker. Thirty-seven-year-old Larisa Kupreeva and her three-year-old son lived in the apartment. Making sure that there was no one else, Arkady closed the door and took out an ax. To prevent the neighbors from hearing the screams, he turned on the tape recorder at full volume. Having killed Larisa, Neiland did not spare the child. Then he went to the kitchen and had lunch. Afterwards, he began to rob. But the loot turned out to be not as rich as the criminal expected. He managed to find some money and a camera. By the way, he found a use for the technique - he photographed the dead Larisa in obscene poses. Arkady hoped to sell these photos and improve his financial condition.
Arkady chose the victim by chance
Before leaving, Neyland turned on the gas in the kitchen and set the wood floors on fire. After which he set off to meet his dream. By the way, the teenager left the murder weapon at the crime scene.
Larisa's neighbors smelled burning and called the fire department. They worked quickly and the apartment was practically not damaged. Then the police appeared. Based on numerous fingerprints, an ax, and the testimony of witnesses, they were able to quickly identify the criminal. All that remained was to find him.
Larisa Kupreeva and her son Georgy
This happened just three days later. Neiland was arrested in Sukhumi. The meeting with the dream turned out to be fleeting...
"Everyone will forgive"
During interrogations, Arkady behaved very confidently, even arrogantly. He actively helped the investigation, was not afraid of anything and did not repent of what he had done. Neyland repeatedly repeated to the police that “everything will be forgiven” for the youngster.
The incident received wide publicity, causing a storm of discussion. The trial took place on March 23, 1964. And the verdict turned out to be extremely unexpected: Arkady was sentenced to death. The surprise was that such a decision was contrary to the legislation of the RSFSR. After all, people from 18 to 60 years old could be sentenced to death. Citizens of the Soviet Union were divided into two camps. Some supported the judge's decision, others demanded that the law be followed. The latter point of view was shared by foreign lawyers and the media. Foreign newspapermen immediately trumpeted the flagrant violation of international agreements. There is even a version that Brezhnev tried to intercede for the criminal, but Khrushchev stopped this attempt. And the increased attention had no effect on Neyland’s fate. He was shot on August 11 of the same year.
According to legend, Brezhnev stood up for Neiland
By the way, there was another case in the USSR when a minor was sentenced to death. In 1940, Vladimir Vinnichevsky was shot for murder and sexual violence. Its victims were eight children aged two to five years old. But that pre-war case was completely legal. The fact is that at that time in the USSR the resolution of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars “On measures to combat juvenile delinquency” was in force. According to it, the death penalty could be applied to persons over twelve years of age.
>And why immediately equate me with those who kill, I don’t put an equal sign between the one who executed Chikatilo and Chikatilo himself, as you do<
Don't exaggerate! I did not equate you with murderers. I wrote: there is something in common. Something, not everything! It's a big difference. And this is something, the very idea that you can kill. Criminals do this for profit/pleasure/self-affirmation, and people who want to return the death penalty for the sake of a falsely understood sense of justice.
The people who executed Chikatilo simply did their duty. If the law had not provided for the death penalty at that moment, it is not a fact that they would have rushed into his cell shouting - let me shoot him! And you are engaged in precisely the propaganda of murder, even of the murderers themselves. Moreover, you are unlikely to do this yourself. Do you want to know how those who carry out the sentence feel? And please:
>Oh how you are hooked<
What??? What are you talking about??? I simply defend my opinion, and I do it with reasoning, with links and numbers, unlike you. If the very presence of arguments is “hooked” for you, well... that means you’re hooked!
>- The conversation was specifically about you, in response to my words that if in reality your child was brutally tortured by a maniac, you would not say - let him live, he does not deserve to die. You stated that - “If a criminal harms someone close to me, I would be quite happy with his life imprisonment.” “We’re not talking about harm; they don’t give capital punishment for that.” And you keep dodging the answer and referring to others<
No, dear! It is you who are trying to shift the blame from a sick person to a healthy one, this time in the literal sense of the word! Let him live, he does not deserve to die - this means there is no need to punish anyone at all! Like, let him go in peace! I have never claimed anything like this, and I don’t claim anything like that! On the contrary, I am for inevitable punishment! And life imprisonment is a more severe punishment for me than the UK. And as a bonus, there is the opportunity to release an innocent person if his innocence can be proven. So don't overdo it!
For you, the only 100% argument will be the death of one of my loved ones? Yes, I’m afraid you will come up with twists in this case too! You are one of those who simply do not listen to any arguments. I gave you a specific example of people who were asked exactly the question you asked me. And you know very well what they answered. Their loved ones suffered, and they saw those who did it pay for it. They are satisfied with everything, and those who need an insurance company continue to demand an insurance company on their behalf! This is no longer funny at all! Very similar to the behavior of maniacs. We don't care about anything, we want them to kill! All that remains is to demand that this be done publicly, as in China (by the way, such demands are already being made) and at the same time hand out popcorn! Bread and circuses! Two thousand years of social development down the drain! But at the same time, we wait until society becomes civilized and humanized. But all of you who demand the UK are part of this society. And it is you who resist with all your might, setting a low ceiling for the moral development of society. And while this continues, we will continue to wait by the sea for weather in terms of a civilized society, and those who slow down this development will blame everything on bad genes! No, to look in the mirror, what the hell, genes are to blame.
It's funny to read how you admit your own ignorance. Even at the stage of detention, prisoners are taken away everything with which prisoners can take their own lives. Even shoelaces need to be removed and returned, not to mention belts and cutting objects. There are no knives or forks in the cells and barracks; everyone eats only with spoons. And if in the barracks prisoners can still smuggle and hide something like a sharpener or a knife, then in places where those sentenced to prison are kept, this is absolutely impossible! It’s all on YouTube, is it really difficult to study the issue at least a little? And you don’t need to come up with nonsense like you could smash your head against the wall, it won’t be serious at all.
) - a juvenile criminal who in January 1964 committed a double murder in Leningrad and was sentenced to death by the court for this, which was contrary to the current legislation, since at the time of the execution of the sentence Arkady was 15 full years old.
The “Neyland case” caused a public outcry and gave rise to statements about the violation of international law in the USSR.
Biography
Double murder
The picture of the crime was recreated according to the testimony of A. Neiland, interviewed witnesses, criminologists and firefighters. The crime was committed at Sestroretskaya Street, building 3, apartment 9. Neiland chose the victim by chance. He wanted to rob a rich apartment, and the criterion of “wealth” for him was the leather-covered front door. In the apartment there was a 37-year-old housewife Larisa Mikhailovna Kupreeva and her three-year-old son. Neiland rang the doorbell and introduced himself as a postal worker, after which Kupreeva let him into the apartment. Having made sure that there was no one in the apartment except the woman and child, the criminal locked the front door and began beating Kupreeva with an ax. To prevent the neighbors from hearing the screams, he turned on the tape recorder in the room at full volume. After Kupreeva stopped showing signs of life, Neiland killed her son with an ax. After the murder, the criminal searched the apartment and ate food found from the owners. Neiland stole money and a camera from the apartment, with which he previously filmed the murdered woman in obscene poses. According to the killer, he planned to sell these photographs later. In order to cover his tracks, before leaving, Arkady Neyland turned on the gas on the kitchen stove and set fire to the wooden floor in the room. He left the murder weapon - an ax - at the crime scene.
Neighbors smelled burning and called the fire department. Thanks to the fact that firefighters arrived promptly, the crime scene remained virtually untouched by fire.
Consequence
Arkady Neyland fully confessed to what he had done during the first interrogations and actively assisted the investigation. According to investigators, he behaved confidently and was flattered by the attention to his person. He talked about the murder calmly, without remorse. He only pitied the child, but justified his murder by the fact that there was no other way out after the murder of the woman. He was not afraid of punishment, he said that, as a minor, “everything would be forgiven.”
Neyland's case received widespread publicity. In the USSR at this time there was an increase in crime, including among minors. Arkady Neyland in these conditions was an ideal example of an anti-hero.
The court decision in the Neyland case, made on March 23, 1964, was unexpected for everyone: a 15-year-old teenager was sentenced to death, which was contrary to the legislation of the RSFSR, according to which persons from 18 to 60 years old could be sentenced to capital punishment, and the use of the death penalty executions of minors were prohibited in the USSR).
The verdict caused a mixed reaction in society. On the one hand, ordinary people, shocked by the cruelty of the crime, were waiting for the most severe sentence for Neyland. On the other hand, the verdict caused an extremely negative reaction from the intelligentsia and professional lawyers, who pointed out the inconsistency of the verdict with current legislation and international agreements.
The “Neyland Case” became known abroad, where it was cited as an example of disregard for the law under the socialist system.
There is a legend according to which L.I. Brezhnev petitioned
During the last arrest, the idea occurred to Neyland that next time he needed to rob and kill so that there would be no witnesses to the crime. Returning to the same apartment on Sestroretskaya Street on January 27, 1964, Arkady armed himself with a tourist hatchet. He knew that a woman and a child lived in the apartment, which meant it would not be difficult to deal with them. The main calculation of the criminal was that even if he was detained, the death penalty is not applied to minors, which means that the maximum he will face is prison.
In order to be allowed into the apartment, he decided to introduce himself as a postman. When the owner, Larisa Kupreeva, opened the door, he immediately attacked her. The woman began a desperate fight not only for her life, but also for the life of her child, but the criminal with the ax was stronger. After killing the woman, he calmly dealt with the child, after which he ate in the kitchen without a twinge of conscience. To hide traces of the crime, he set fire to the apartment, but thanks to the prompt work of firefighters and the vigilance of neighbors, the fire was extinguished in time. At the crime scene, investigators managed to find fingerprints, which became the main argument in court.
