ЦЕПОВ. Тайна смерти подельника Путина | ЧЕРНОЕ ДЕЛО

Main arguments and findings

• Program framing: An episode of “Черное дело” (Black Deed) argues that a pattern of high-profile poisonings and murders during Vladimir Putin’s era points to sanction at the highest level (portrayed as coming from the “permanent president”).
• “First” in the poisoning chain: The video claims Roman Tsepov (died Sept. 24, 2004) may be the earliest known example of such politically motivated lethal attacks—possibly predating the better-known cases of Litvinenko (2006), Skripal (2018), and Navalny (2020).
• Motive portrayed: The narrator suggests Tsepov became “inconvenient” or crossed limits—implying he knew too much or acted beyond what was allowed—so he was removed to prevent further disclosure.

Claims about Roman Tsepov (Baltika Skort)

• Background: Tsepov is portrayed as an ex-military/internal troops political officer who later became a successful founder/director of the security company “Baltika Skort.”
• Early business rise: The episode highlights his unusually rapid success in the security industry, including early firearm licensing and high-status clients.
• Connection to power: A central theme is that Tsepov’s key contract allowed him to guard Vladimir Putin and the family of Anatoly Sobchak, via official arrangements described as involving city government and internal troops security at the time.
• Public ambiguity about state ties: Tsepov is presented as neither confirming nor denying ties to state security, using evasive wording (“everyone has secrets”).

Alleged influence network

• Key figure: Viktor Zolotov: The episode portrays Viktor Zolotov as closely connected to Tsepov and the company. After Sobchak’s political defeat, Zolotov is said to have found refuge via Baltika Skort.
• Broader “monetization” system: The episode alleges that Tsepov helped monetize the security/power environment, potentially including:
  • managing informal flows tied to gambling/casino profits (described through references to a city-controlled scheme and disputes),
  • influence over appointments in law enforcement,
  • and links to criminal-underworld figures—though much of this is presented as rumor or secondary claims rather than direct proof.
• Skepticism toward some allegations: The video repeatedly notes that certain conspiracy claims lack documentation, but still argues that the overall picture suggests systemic power–crime integration.

Death and poisoning investigation (Sept. 2004)

• Timeline of illness: Tsepov’s condition reportedly worsened after feeling unwell on Sept. 11, 2004. Hospital transfers followed, and he died after a deterioration (described as a “difficult death”).
• Competing death causes in media: Early press reports claimed poisoning by a drug associated with leukemia treatment; however, the episode states no official forensic details or named drug evidence were shown.
• Murder case: A criminal case for murder was opened, but the episode says it remains unrevealed and was not effectively progressed.

Core hypothesis: radioactive poisoning

• Radiation-sickness similarity: The episode argues that medical descriptions of Tsepov’s symptoms resembled radiation sickness, referencing:
  • claims that forensic examinations determined death by a radioactive element, and
  • a doctor’s statement that the clinical picture matched radiation illness.
• Polonium 210 rationale: The episode asserts that Tsepov’s symptoms align with later Alexander Litvinenko’s confirmed polonium-210 poisoning—suggesting Tsepov was killed in the same “chain.”
• Detection argument: It claims that common dosimeters may not detect polonium’s relevant emissions well (especially alpha particles), so lack of readings would not rule out polonium.
• Uncertainty acknowledged: The video treats the evidence as suggestive rather than definitively conclusive, emphasizing that forensic results remain unclear and the case may not be revisited soon.

Conclusion of the episode

The episode concludes that Tsepov’s death likely fits a broader sequence of lethal actions against people close to Putin or within his inner ecosystem.

It argues that removing Tsepov would have been rational for the same leadership allegedly authorizing later poisonings: someone with access and influence could become a security risk if they stopped fitting the “vertical.”

Presenters / contributors (as named in the subtitles)

• Denis Korotkov — journalist, Dossier Center
• Andrei Zakharov — referenced (investigation)
• Vladimir Ivanits(a) — referenced (Novaya Gazeta investigation)
• Igor Korolkov — referenced (journalist; investigative-file source)
• Alexander (Galdfarp) — referenced as Alexander Litvinenko’s lawyer
• Boris Voldarsky — historian
• Pyotr Perumov — doctor / treating physician
• Dmitry Zapolsky — referenced (memoirs/book claims)
• Anatoly Sobchak — referenced
• Vladimir Putin — referenced
• Viktor Zolotov — referenced
• Mikhail Vanichkin — referenced
• Vladimir Kumarin — referenced
• Roman Zolotov (Viktor Zolotov’s son) — referenced (cameo)
• Andrei Konstantinov — referenced (founder mentioned)
• Kirill Metelev — referenced
• Konstantin Goloshchapov — referenced
• Arkady (Retenberk) — referenced