EXAMINATION OF THE ACCUSED KAMENEV

The morning 開会／開廷／会期 of August 20 開始するs with the examination of the （刑事）被告 L. B. Kamenev.

Kamenev 明言する／公表するs: "The テロリスト cospiracy was 組織するd and guided by myself, Zinoviev and Trotsky. I became 納得させるd that the 政策 of the Party, the 政策 of its leadership, had been 勝利を得た in the only sense in which the political victory in the land of 社会主義 is possible, that this 政策 was 認めるd by the 集まりs of the toilers. Our banking on the 可能性 of a 分裂（する） in the Party also 証明するd groundless. We counted on the 右翼の人 group of Rykov, Bukharin and Tomsky. The 除去 of this group from the leadership and the fact that it had become discredited in the 注目する，もくろむs of the toiling 集まりs 奪うd us of this trump card 同様に. It was no use counting on any 肉親，親類d of serious 内部の difficulties to 安全な・保証する the 倒す of the leadership which had guided the country through 極端に difficult 行う／開催する／段階s, through industrialization and collectivization. Two paths remained: either honestly and copletely to put a stop to the struggle against the Party, or to continue this struggle, but without any hope of 得るing any 集まり support どれでも, without a political 壇・綱領・公約, without a 旗，新聞一面トップの大見出し／大々的に報道する, that is to say, by means of individual terror. We chose the second path. In this we were guided by our boundless 憎悪 of the leaders of the Party and the country, and by a かわき for 力／強力にする with which we were once so closely associated and from which we were cast aside by the course of historical 開発."

Replying to Comrade Vyshinsky, the （刑事）被告 Kamenev relates to the 法廷，裁判所 how the Zinovievites entered into a 圏  with the Trotskyites for the 目的 of 組織するing a terroristic struggle against the Party and the Soviet 明言する／公表する. "We carried on 交渉s about the 圏  with Smirnov, Mrachkovsky and Ter-Vaganyan, not as with men who 独立して 問題／発行するd political 指示／教授／教育s," says Kamenev. "They were of value to us as men who 正確に repeated the 指示／教授／教育s of Trotsky. Knowing Smirnov and Mrachkovsky as active Trotskyites , knowing that Smirnov had been abroad and had 設立するd 接触する with Trotsky there, we were 絶対 sure that the 指示／教授／教育s 関心ing テロ行為 伝えるd by Smirnov and Mrachkovsky,and supported by them, were the exact 指示／教授／教育s of Trotsky. It was on this basis, and because Trotsky's 指示／教授／教育s on terror 同時に起こる／一致するd with our own inclinations, that we 結論するd what is here called a '圏,'  and what should be called a 狭くする テロリスト 共謀. This 共謀 took 形態／調整 in 1932 as an 組織の union wich had no 壇・綱領・公約 at all, and which 始める，決める itself the 目的（とする） of 掴むing 力／強力にする by disorganizing the 政府 by terroristic means, by 除去するing and assassinating Stalin, as the leader of the Party and the country, 同様に as his nearest comrades-in-武器."

The （刑事）被告 Kamenev fully 確認するs the 主要な part played by I. N. Smirnov in the Trotskyite part of the テロリスト Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre, and 関心ing Smirnov's 否定s he says: "It is ridiculous wriggling, which only creates a comical impression."

Kamenev then goes on to tell the 法廷，裁判所 about the practical activities of the 反対する-革命の テロリストs. He says:

"In the summer of 1932 a 会合 of our Zinovievite centre was held in our 郊外住宅 in Ilyinskoye. I myself, Zinoviev, Evdokimov, Bakayev, Kuklin and Karev were 現在の. At this 会合 Zinoviev 報告（する）／憶測d that the union with the Trotskyites, who had received Trotsky's personal 指示／教授／教育s to commit terroristic 行為／法令／行動するs, was an 遂行するd fact. At this very 会合 Bakayev was 教えるd to carry out a terroristic 行為／法令／行動する in Moscow, and Karev in Leningrad. The 追放する of myself and Zinoviev somewhat held up the 死刑執行 of our terroristic 計画（する）s. When we returned to Moscow, we made no changes whatever in the basis of our 圏.  On the contrary, we proceeded to 圧力（をかける） 今後 the terroristic 共謀. This 圧力（をかける）ing 今後 was 原因（となる）d by two circumstances: first the 崩壊（する） of the 政策 of 二塁打-取引，協定ing 追求するd by Zinoviev, who was 除去するd from the 編集（者）の board of the Bolshevik.  This made us 恐れる that （警察などへの）密告，告訴（状） about our 関係 with Trotsky might have reached the Party leadership. Secondly, the Trotskyites energetically 主張するd on 促進するing the terroristic activities, having received 指示／教授／教育s to this 影響 from Trotsky. Organizationally, this 設立する 表現 in the 決定／判定勝ち（する） that was 可決する・採択するd to 急いで the 暗殺 of Stalin and the 暗殺 of Kirov."

Continuing, the （刑事）被告 Kamenev 証言するs: "In June 1934 I myself went to Leningrad where I 教えるd the active Zinovievite Yakovlev to 準備する an 試みる／企てる on the life of Kirov 平行の with the Nikolayev-Kotolynov group. In the beginning of November1934 I learned from Bakayev's 報告（する）／憶測 all the 詳細（に述べる）s of the 準備s that were 存在 made by the Nikolayev group to assassinate Kirov."

Vyshinsky:  Was Kirov's 暗殺 直接／まっすぐに the work of your 手渡すs?

Kamenev:  Yes.

Kamenev gives the に引き続いて 証言 on the composition of the テロリスト Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre:

"The centre of the 共謀 consisted of the に引き続いて persons: myself, Zinoviev, Evdokimov, Bakayev and Kuklin, on に代わって of the Zinovievites; Smirnov, Mrachkovsky and Ter-Vaganyan on に代わって of the Trotskyites. の中で the leaders of the 共謀 another person may be 指名するd who in point of fact was one of the leaders, but who, in 見解（をとる） of the special 計画（する）s we made in regard to him, was not drawn into the practical work. I 言及する to Sokolnikov.

Vyshinsky:  Who was a member of the centre, but whose part was kept a strict secret?

Kamenev:  Yes.

Continuing, Kamenev says: "Knowing that we might be dicovered, we 指定するd a small group to continue our terroristic activities. For this 目的 we 指定するd Sokolnikov. It seemed to us that on the 味方する of the Trotskyites this 役割 could be 首尾よく 成し遂げるd by Serebryakov and Radek. Asked about this, Mrachkovsky said: Yes, in our opinion Serebryakov and Radek could 行為／法令／行動する as 代用品，人s if, contrary to our 期待s, our 主要な group should be discovered."

Kamenev goes on to say that the Zinovievites carried on 交渉s and 設立するd 接触する with other 反対する-革命の groups 同様に.

"In 1932," he says, "I 本人自身で 行為／行うd 交渉s with the いわゆる '左派の（人）' group of Lominadre and Shatsky. In this group I 設立する enemies of the Party leadership やめる 用意が出来ている to 訴える手段／行楽地 to the most 決定するd 対策 of struggle against it. At the same time, I myself and Zinoviev 持続するd constant 接触する with the former '労働者s' 対立' group of shlyapnikov and Medvedyev. In 1932, 1933 and 1934 I 本人自身で 持続するd relations with Tomsky and Bukharin and sounded their political 感情s. They sympathized with us. When I asked Tomsky about Rykov's でっちあげる，人を罪に陥れる of mind, he replied: 'Rykov thinks the same as I do.' In reply to my qestion as to what Bukharin thought, he said: 'Bukharin thinks the same as I do, but is 追求するing somewhat different 策略: he does not agree with the line of the Party, but is 追求するing 策略 of 断固としてやる enrooting himself in the Party and winning the personal 信用／信任 of leadership.' "

In 診察するing the （刑事）被告 Kamenev the 法廷，裁判所 取引，協定s in 詳細（に述べる） with the 二塁打-取引，協定ing to which the conspirators 訴える手段／行楽地d in 新規加入 to テロ行為 in their fight against the Party.

Vyshinsky:  What 評価 should be given of the articles and 声明s you wrote in 1933, in which you 表明するd 忠義 to the Party? Deception?

Kamenev:  No, worse than deception.

Vyshinsky:  Perfidy?

Kamenev:  Worse.

Vyshinsky:  Worse than deception, worse than perfidy - find the word. 背信?

Kamenev:  You have 設立する it.

Vyshinsky:  （刑事）被告 Zinoviev, do you 確認する this?

Zinoviev:  Yes.

Vyshinsky:  背信, perfidy, 二塁打-取引，協定ing?

Zinoviev:  Yes.

訴訟／進行 to explain the 動機s of his 行為／行う, the （刑事）被告 Kamenev 宣言するs:

"I can 収容する／認める only one thing: that having 始める，決める ourselves the monstrously 犯罪の 目的（とする） of disorganizing the 政府 of the land of 社会主義, we 訴える手段／行楽地d to methods of struggle which in our opinion ふさわしい this 目的（とする） and which are as low and as vile as the 目的（とする） which we 始める，決める before ourselves."

in the その上の 過程 of the examination the （刑事）被告 Kamenev still more 明確に and definitely speaks of that which guided the Zinovievites in their activities.

Vyshinsky:  その結果, your struggle against the leaders of the Party and the 政府 was guided by 動機s of a personal base character - by the かわき for personal 力／強力にする?

Kamenev:  Yes, by the かわき for 力／強力にする of our group.

Vyshinsky:  Don't you think that this has nothing in ありふれた with social ideals?

Kamenev:  It has as much in ありふれた as 革命 has with 反対する-革命.

Vyshinsky:  That is, you are on the 味方する of 反対する-革命?

Kamenev:  Yes.

Vyshinsky: その結果, you 明確に perceive that you are flighting against 社会主義?

Kamenev:  We 明確に perseive that we are fighting against the leaders of the Party and of the 政府 who are 主要な the country to 社会主義.

Vyshinsky:  その為に you are fighting 社会主義 同様に, aren't you?

Kamenev:  You are 製図／抽選 the 結論 of an historian and 検察官，検事.

At the end of the examination of the （刑事）被告 Kamenev, ComradeVyshinsky reminds him that in his 証言 on August 10 he 明言する／公表するd that the conspirators ーするつもりであるd, after 掴むing 力／強力にする, to 任命する Bakayev 長，指導者 of the O.G.P.U. and so cover up the traces of their 罪，犯罪s.

Kamenev 主張するs that the Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre had in this 関係 not the 意向 of 肉体的に 皆殺しにするing those who 直接／まっすぐに committed terroristic 行為／法令／行動するs, but of コースを変えるing the 調査 of terroristic 行為／法令／行動するs into 誤った channels.

The （刑事）被告 Reingold categorically 主張するs that the Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre ーするつもりであるd to wipe out their gunmen テロリストs ーするために 保護物，者 the Trotskyite-Zinovievite leaders and cover up the traces of the 罪，犯罪s. Indignat at Kamenev's 声明, Reingold says: "Let Kamenev not pretend that he is such an innocent creature. He is a 常習的な 政治家，政治屋 who would 軍隊 his way to 力／強力にする over mountains of 死体s. Would he hesitate to kill off one or two テロリストs? No one will believe him!"

The 法廷，裁判所 then proceeds to 診察する the 証言，証人／目撃する Yakovlev, 召喚するd at the request of the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事.

Comrade Vyshinsky asks Yakovlev to tell about Kamenev's 関係s with him, Yakovlev, in the terroristic activities 追求するd by Kamenev.

Yakovlev 証言するs that Karev, who worked with him in the 反対する-革命の group at the 学院 of Sciences, had 知らせるd him of the に引き続いて: In the autumn of 1932 the Zinovievites 組織するd a圏  with the Trotskyites. A 部隊d Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre was 始める，決める up. The 主要な／長／主犯 method of fighting against the Party and the Soviet 政府 可決する・採択するd by this centre was テロ行為, which it was decided to direct against the leaders of the Party and the 政府, in the first place against Stalin and Kirov.

Continuing, Yakovlev says: "This was 確認するd by Kamenev himself in conversation with me in 1934. In this 関係 Kamenev （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限d me to 組織する a テロリスト group at the 学院 of Sciences. I 受託するd this （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限. At the same time Kamenev 知らせるd me that 指示／教授／教育s to 準備する terroristic 行為／法令／行動するs had been given also to other groups. In Moscow, 準備s were 存在 made for an 試みる／企てる on the life of Stalin, and in Leningrad it was 提案するd to commit a terroristic 行為／法令／行動する against Kirov, this 使節団 存在 ゆだねるd to the Rumyantsev-Kotolynov group."

Vyshinsky:  In his 証言 the （刑事）被告 Kamenev について言及するd Yakovlev (turning to Kamenev). Is this the Yakovlev in question?

Kamenev:  Yes, it is.

Vyshinsky:  And did you 会合，会う him?

Kamenev:  I did.

Vyshinsky:  Did you ゆだねる him with the 仕事 of 準備するing a terroristic 行為／法令／行動する 平行の with that of the Rumyantsev-Kotolynov group? Do you 確認する this?

Kamenev:  Yes.

Vyshinsky:  And you, Yakovlev, do you 確認する this?

Yakovlev:  Yes.

After several questions have been put to Kamenev by Ter-Vaganyan and Smirnov which elicited the fact that Kamenev had repeated conversations about テロ行為 with Ter-Vaganyan in 1932, the 法廷，裁判所 proceeds to 診察する the （刑事）被告 Zinoviev.

Zinoviev begins his 証言 by relating the history of the 復古／返還 of the 部隊d Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre in 1932. He 強調するs that there never were any 構成要素 differences between the Trotskyites and the Zinovievites.

"Our differences with Trotsky after the Fifteenth 議会," says Zinoviev, "when Trotsky used the world 'treachery' in relation to me and Kamenev, were really slight zig-zags, petty 不一致s. We committed no treachery whatever against Trotsky at that time, but committed one more 行為／法令／行動する of treachery against the Bolshevik Party to which we belonged."

Grigory E. Zinoviev (1883-1936).

But it was 正確に at that moment, says Zinoviev, continuing his 証言, that we were 完全に 可決する・採択するing, as our main line,二塁打-取引，協定ing to which we had already 訴える手段／行楽地d 以前, which we had practised in 1926 and in 1927. In 1928, however, after the Fifteenth 議会 of the C.P.S.U., we could not take a 選び出す／独身 step, we could not utter a 選び出す／独身 word without betraying the Party in one way or another, without 訴える手段／行楽地ing to 二塁打-取引，協定ing in one way or another. "From 1928 to 1932," Zinoviev says その上の, "there was not for one moment any real difference between ourselves and the Trotskyites. And so the logic of things carried us to テロ行為.

"We banked on a growth of difficulties. We hoped that they would grow to such an extent that we and the 右翼の人s and the Trotskyites, and the smaller groups associated with them, could come out 率直に. We dreamt of coming out in a 部隊d 前線. At that time we thought that the 右翼の人s had most chances of success,that their prognoses were more likely to come true, and that their 指名するs would have particular 力／強力にする of attraction. At that time we 試みる／企てるd to place particular 強調 on our closeness to them."

Continuing, Zinoviev says: "At the same time 確かな 地下組織の groups of the 権利 同様に as of the いわゆる 'Left' 傾向, sought 接触する with me and Kamenev. Approaches were made by the 残余s of the '労働者s' 対立': by shlyapnikov and Medvedyev. Approaches （機の）カム from the groups of the いわゆる '左派の（人）s': that is, Lominadze, Shatskin, Sten and others. Approaches also （機の）カム from the いわゆる 'individuals,' to whose numbers belonged Smilga, and to a 確かな extent, Sokolnikov."

Zinoviev その上の says: "In the second half of 1932 we relized that our banking on a growth of difficulties in the country had failed. We began to realize that the Party and its Central 委員会 would 打ち勝つ these difficulties. But both in the first and in the second half of 1932 we were filled with 憎悪 に向かって the Central 委員会 of the Party and に向かって Stalin."

Continuing, Zinoviev says: "We were 納得させるd that the leadership must be superseded at all costs, that it must be superseded by us, along with Trotsky. In this 状況／情勢 I had 会合s with Smirnov who has （刑事）被告 me here of frequently telling untruths. Yes, I often told untruths. I started doing that from the moment I began flighting the Bolshevik Party. In so far as Smirnov took the road of fighting the Party, he too is telling untruths. But it seems, the difference between him and myself is that I have decided 堅固に and irrevocably to tell at this last moment the truth, 反して, he it seems has 可決する・採択するd a different 決定／判定勝ち（する）.

Vyshinsky:  Are you telling the whole truth now?

Zinoviev:  Now I am telling the whole truth to the end.

Vyshinsky:  Remember that on January 15-16, 1935, at the 開会／開廷／会期s of the 軍の Collegium of the 最高裁判所, you also 主張するd that you were telling the whole truth.

Zinoviev:  Yes. On January 15-16 I did not tell the whole truth.

Vyshinsky:  You did not tell the truth, but you 持続するd that you were telling the truth.

Continuing his 証言, Zinoviev relates that during his conversations with Smirnov in 1931 he conferred with him with regard to an understanding on 部隊ing the Trotskyites and the Zinovievites on the basis of テロ行為 and that this was done on Trotsky's 指示／教授／教育. "I. N. Smirnov 完全に agreed with this 指示／教授／教育, and carried it out wholeheartedly and with 有罪の判決, "証言するs Zinoviev. "I spoke a 広大な／多数の／重要な を取り引きする Smirnov about choosing people for terroristic activities and also 指定するd the persons against whom the 武器 of テロ行為 was to be directed. The 指名する of Stalin was について言及するd in the first place, followed by those of Kirov, Voroshilov and other leaders of the Party and the 政府. For the 目的 of 遂行する／発効させるing these 計画（する）s, a Trotskyite-Zinovievite テロリスト centre was formed, the 主要な part in which was played by myself-Zinoviev,and by Smirnov on に代わって of the Trotskyites."

Vyshinsky:  Thus, summing up your 証言, we may draw the 結論 that in the organization of the Trotskyite-Zinovievite テロリスト 圏  and centre, the 決定的な part was played, on the one 手渡す, by you, as the leader of the Zinovievites, and, on the other, by Trotsky through his 代表者／国会議員s?

Zinoviev:  That is 訂正する.

Vyshinsky:  At that time Trotsky's 主要な／長／主犯 代表者／国会議員 and even 副 in the U.S.S.R. was I. N. Smirnov?

Zinoviev:  That is 訂正する.

Vyshinsky:  Was the 承認 of the necessity of テロ行為 the 決定的な 条件 for 部隊ing the Trotskyites and Zinovievites?

Zinoviev:  Yes.

Vyshinsky:  Did you and Smirnov 指定する the persons against whom terror was to be directed in the first instance? Is it true that these persons were Comrade Stalin, Comrade Kirov and Comrade Voroshilov?

Zinoviev:  That was the central question.

Continuing his 証言 Zinoviev 明言する／公表するs, in reply to a question by Comrade Vyshinsky as to what practical steps were taken in 準備 for the 暗殺 of the leaders of the Party and the 政府, that in the autumn of 1932 a 会議／協議会 was held in Ilyinskoye …に出席するd by himself, Kamenev, Evdokimov, Bakayev and Karev. At this 会議／協議会 Bakayev was ゆだねるd with the practical direction of 事柄s connected with テロ行為.

Continuing, Zinoviev says: "When Kamenev and I went into 追放する after the Ryutin 事件／事情／状勢 fell through, we left Evdokimov, Bakayev and Smirnov in 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金 of terroristic activities. We placed special hopes on Smirnov." "At the same time," says Zinoviev, "I 行為／行うd 交渉s with Tomsky, whom I 知らせるd about our 圏  with the Trotskyites. Tomsky 表明するd 完全にする 団結 with us. After our return from 追放する the first steps we took were directed toward （負債など）支払うing, if one may so 表明する it, the 決裂／故障 of our terroristic activities, the fiasco of the conspirators, and toward 回復するing 信用／信任 ーするために be able to continue our terroristic activities later on. We continued our 策略, which 代表するd a combination of ever subtler forms of perfidious doubledealing with the 準備 of the 共謀."

"After the 殺人 of Sergei Mironovich Kirov," says Zinoviev, "our perfidy went to such lengths that I sent an obituary about Kirov to Pravda , That obituary was not published. As far as I remember, Kamenev, and I think Evdokimov also, wrote obituaries on Kirov. At all events, Kamenev knew that I would send in my obituary.

Vyshinsky:  Then you did that by 予選 協定?

Zinoviev:  As far as I remember, I told Kamenev that I was sending in an obituary. He, I think, said that he would either send one himself or that the office at which he was working would send a 集団の／共同の obituary which he would 調印する.

Vyshinsky:  Don't you 解任する this, （刑事）被告 Kamenev?

Kamenev:  I do not remember. And I did not know that Zinoviev ーするつもりであるd to send in an obituary. I knew that after the events of December I, and after the 逮捕（する） of Bakayev and Endokimov, Zinoviev （機の）カム to me and showed me the 草案 of a letter 演説（する）／住所d to Yagoda, General Commissar of 明言する／公表する 安全, in which he 明言する／公表するd that he was 乱すd by these 逮捕（する）s and asked to be 召喚するd ーするために 設立する the fact that he, Zinoviev, had nothing to do with this 殺人.

Vyshinsky:  Was that the 事例／患者, （刑事）被告 Zinoviev?

Zinoviev:  Yes, it was.

Kamenev:  Then I said that he should not do that because I thought that after all we had done we せねばならない keep some composure.

Vyshinsky:  Did you 後継する in keeping your composure?

Kamenev:  Yes, I wrote no such letter.

After that, Zinoviev 明言する／公表するs, he sent Bakayev in 1934 to Leningrad to 調査／捜査する the 進歩 reached in the 準備s for the 暗殺 of Kirov. Zinoviev says: "I sent Bakayev to Leningrad as one who enjoyed our 信用／信任, who knew very 井戸／弁護士席 the 職員／兵員 of the テロリストs, ーするために check up on the people, the 状況／情勢, the degree of preparedness, etc. On his return fromLeningrad Bakayev 報告（する）／憶測d that everything was in order."

Vyshinsky:  Were you sure that everything was going on 井戸／弁護士席?

Zinoviev:  I considered that all the work had been done.

Vyshinsky:  Did you 急いで, did you 促進する the 暗殺 of Kirov? Were there times when you 表明するd 不満 with a 確かな 手段 of slowness on the part of your テロリストs?

Zinoviev:  Yes, I 表明するd some 不満.

Vyshinsky:  Can we say that you were not only the 組織者 and inspirer of the 暗殺 of Kirov, but also the 組織者 of the more expeditious 現実化 of this event?

Zinoviev:  There was a time when I tried to 促進する it.

Continuing his 証言, Zinoviev speaks of his 会合s with M. Lurye (Emel) who had brought Trotsky's テロリスト 指示／教授／教育s. "I knew," Zinoviev says, "that M. Lurye was a Trotskyite, and not a Trotskyite only, for when he spoke one could even hear the language of a 国粋主義者／ファシスト党員."

Vyshinsky;  In what did his fascism show itself?

Zinoviev:  His fascism showed itself when he said that in a 状況／情勢 like the 現在の we must 訴える手段／行楽地 to the use of every possible means.

From a reply to a question put by Comrade Vyshinsky to M. Lurye it becomes （疑いを）晴らす that Zinoviev met M. Lurye three times after the latter's arrival from Berlin. At one 会合 between M. Lurye and Zinoviev, at the latter's apartment, the conversation between the two was frank. They discussed the テロリスト 指示／教授／教育s of Trotsky which M. Lurye had reseived in Berlin through Ruth Fischer and Maslov, and which he then 伝えるd to Zinoviev through Herzberg.

M. Lurye says: "I asked Zinoviev whether he was 知らせるd about the 事例／患者 of Nathan Lurye. Zinoviev replied in the affirmative."

その上の, M. Lurye told Zinoviev that Nathan Lurye was connected with a 確かな Franz Weitz. When Zinoviev asked who Franz Weitz was, M. Lurye 知らせるd him that Franz Weitz was a man 特に 信用d by Himmler, the 現在の 長，指導者 of the Gestapo. "I again asked him," continues M. Lurye, "whether he was 地位，任命するd on this group. Zinoviev replied in the affirmative. To my perplexed question as to whether it was permissible for Marxists to practise individual terror and 持続する 接触する with 国粋主義者／ファシスト党員 groups, followed the reply. 'You are an historian, aren't you, Moissel Ilyich,' and he drew the 平行の of Bismarck and Lassalle, 追加するing: 'why cannot we today 利用する Himmler?' "

After Lurye's replies Zinoviev 主張するs that this 宣告，判決 was uttered by Lurye himself. He 収容する／認めるs however that Lurye 現実に visited him in his apartment and discussed テロ行為 with him.

Replying to a question put to him by Comrade Ulrich, 大統領 of the 法廷，裁判所, about the part he, Zinoviev, played in 準備するing a terroristic 行為／法令／行動する against Comrade Stalin, Zinoviev says that he took part in this 事件／事情／状勢 and that he knew of two 試みる／企てるs on the life of Comrade Stalin in which Reingold, Dreitzer and Pickel had taken part. Zinoviev also 確認するs that he rekommended his 私的な 長官, Bogdan, to Bakayev, the leader of the テロリスト groups, as the one to assassinate Comrade Stalin.

Vyshinsky:  Did you recommend Bogdan to Bakayev for the 目的 of carrying out the 暗殺 of Comrade Stalin? Do you 確認する that?

Zinoviev:  I do.

The 法廷，裁判所 then proceeds to 診察する the 証言，証人／目撃する Safonova, whose 事例／患者 has been 始める，決める aside for separate 裁判，公判 and who was 召喚するd at the request of the 明言する／公表する 検察官，検事.

Safanova 証言するs that she was a member of the Trotskyite centre and took an active part in the work of that centre.She goes on to say that in 1931 I. N. Smirnov 知らせるd the centre of the Trotskyite organization, in the persons of Ter-Vaganyan, Mrachkovsky and herself, that he had received in Berlin, through Sedov, 指示／教授／教育s to 可決する・採択する terroristic methods of struggle. I. N. Smirnov, in 伝えるing these 指示／教授／教育s, 強調するd that they （機の）カム from Trotsky. Safonova その上の 証言するs: "At that same 会合 Smirnov 知らせるd us that the centre had decided to 可決する・採択する テロ行為, and in the first place to commit a terroristic 行為／法令／行動する against Stalin. In 1932 Smirnov reseived from Trotsky directions brought by Gaven. These directions were a direct 確定／確認 of Trotsky's 指示／教授／教育 on テロ行為 以前 received by Smirnov through Sedov. Smirnov also 知らせるd us about these directions. These directions were not only a 確定／確認 of those 伝えるd through Sedov, but were at the same time 指示／教授／教育s on the necessity of 急いでing the terroristic 行為／法令／行動する against Stalin."

Safonova 特記する／引用するs another fact illustrating I. N. Smirnov's 態度 に向かって テロ行為. "One day," she says, "Mrachkovsky, on returning from an 公式訪問 to Stalin, 関係のある his conversation with Stalin. I myself and I. N. Smirnov were 現在の. In relating his conversation with Stalin, Mrachkovsky linked up his story with the prospect of our その上の struggle and 宣言するd that the only way out was to assassinate Stalin. I. N. Smirnov 堅固に 支援するd Mrachkovsky's 結論.

"Before my 出発 for the Amur-Baikal 鉄道 construction 職業 in December 1932," says Safonova, continuing her 証拠, "I had a conversation with Smirnov about the その上の work of our organization in 関係 with the 決定／判定勝ち（する） on テロ行為 which had been 可決する・採択するd. I. N. Smirnov categorically 確認するd that Stalin must be assassinated, that Stalin would be assassinated."

Smirnov 否定するs that he had passed on to Ter-Vaganyan, Mrachkovsky and Safonova Trotsky's 指示／教授／教育 to 可決する・採択する テロ行為. He also 否定するs that, when Mrachkovsky returned after his talk with Stalin, he spoke of the necessity of assassinating Stalin. However, replies to questions put by Comrade Vyshinsky to Ter-Vaganyan, Safonova and Mrachkovsky 設立する that this 現実に did take place.

In 見解（をとる） of the fact that Safonova's 証拠 完全に exposed Smirnov, Comrade Vyshinsky makes （疑いを）晴らす the relations between Smirnov and Safonova.

Vyshinsky:  What were your relations with Safonova?

Smirnov:  Good.

Vyshinsky:  And more?

Smirnov:  We were intimately 関係のある.

Vyshinsky:  You were husband and wife?

Smirnov:  Yes.

Vyshinsky:  No personal grudges between you?

Smirnov :  No.

The 証拠 of the （刑事）被告 and of 証言，証人／目撃するs utterly exposes Smirnov as one of the 主要な／長／主犯 leaders of テロ行為 against the leaders of the Party and the Soviet 政府, which Smirnov 追求するd on the direct 指示／教授／教育s of Trotsky.

This 結論するs the morning 開会／開廷／会期.