Trial of Russian Who Told Husband to “Rape Ukrainian Women” Proceeds

Oksana Matsopa

Journalist

Monday, 10 March, 2025

The link has been copied

A fresh court hearing has been scheduled in the case of Olga Bykovska, the wife of a Russian soldier who was recorded urging her husband to rape Ukrainian women.

The case was submitted to court two years ago but delayed due to jurisdictional issues. Most recently, in January 21, 2025, Kyiv’s Shevchenko district court heard testimony from an investigative journalist who had worked on identifying the couple.

The conversation between the married air was first made public on April 12, 2022 when Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) released a fragment of an intercepted phone call.

In the recording, the woman can be heard laughing as she instructs him to rape Ukrainian women and not to tell her about it.

“Yes, go ahead and rape Ukrainian women there, OK? And don’t tell me anything. Got it?” the woman said.

“Rape and not tell you anything?” the Russian soldier responded.

“Yes, and I don’t want to know anything. What’s the problem?” she replied, still laughing.

“So, is it allowed then?” the soldier replied.

“Yes, I am giving you permission. Just be careful!” the woman said.

“Alright,” the soldier responded.

Three days later, journalists from Radio Svoboda’s investigative Schemes project revealed the identities of the soldier and his wife in their report. They discovered that the soldier was 27-year-old Roman Bykovsky, who serves in the Russian National Guard, also known as Rosgvardia. His wife Olga, also 27, is from the Oryol region of Russia. The soldier was stationed in occupied Kherson region at the time of the conversation.

The reporters discovered that Bykovsky had served in an elite unit of the Russian National Guard in 2016. In 2017, he moved with his family to occupied Crimea, where he continued to serve. It was also revealed that he had previously served in the 108th Guards Regiment of Rosgvardia, a unit that actively participated in the occupation of the peninsula.

The investigative journalists obtained the Russian phone numbers of the Bykovsky family from sources in Ukrainian law enforcement and called them.

When contacted, Bykovsky confirmed his name but did not specify whether he serves in the 108th Regiment. He denied that it was his voice in the recording.  

Contacted by the journalists, Olga stated that her husband was wounded but did not specify his location. Following the conversation, she stopped answering calls and deleted her profile on the VKontakte social network

In December 2022, Ukraine’s security service issued an in absentia suspicion to Bykovska, maiden name Piniasova, under Part 1 of Article 14 and Part 1 of Article 438 of Ukraine’s criminal code concerning preparation for violating the laws and customs of war through the cruel treatment of civilians. Investigators say Bykovska created the circumstances, sought accomplices and encouraged her husband to commit the crime of raping Ukrainian women. Bykovsky then agreed. 

Ukrainian investigators currently lack information on whether he acted on this intent. The suspicion also states that Bykovsky, with the 56th Guards Air Assault Regiment, was in the temporarily occupied village of Bilozirka, Kherson region, from February 25, 2022. The conversation with his wife took place by April 6, 2022 at the latest.

Jurisdiction Issues

Following the completion of a pre-trial investigation in December 2022, the case against Bykovska was sent to the Shevchenko district court in Kyiv.

At a preliminary hearing in April 2023, Bykovska’s defence lawyer, Olha Ivanytska from the Centre for Free Legal Aid, argued that under Ukraine’s criminal procedure code, the case should be tried in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed, which she maintained was the Kherson region.

However, prosecutor Oleksandr Safarian of the Prosecutor General’s Office disagreed. He argued that Bykovska’s actions should be considered independently of her husband’s.  Bykovsky’s wife was in Russian-occupied Crimea at an unspecified location that the pre-trial investigation had failed to determine. Due to this uncertainty, the prosecutor contended that if the precise location of the crime could not be established, the case should be heard in a court within the territorial jurisdiction where the pre-trial investigation was completed.

The Shevchenko district court of Kyiv decided to refer the case to the Kyiv court of appeal to resolve the issue of jurisdiction.

In September 2023, the Kyiv court of appeal ruled that the case could remain under the jurisdiction of the Shevchenko district court. 

“In this criminal proceeding, the location of the offence has not been established. Therefore, in accordance with Part 1, Article 32 of Ukraine's criminal procedure code, the case must be heard in the court jurisdiction where the pre-trial investigation was completed,” the appellate ruling stated.  

In April 2024, the Shevchenko district court completed the preliminary stage of proceedings and scheduled substantive hearings. The court also ruled to conduct a special trial in absentia, as the defendant failed to appear in court or respond to investigative summons.

Witness Testimony

On January 21, 2025, Kyiv’s Shevchenko district court heard testimony from Valeria Yehoshyna, an investigative journalist with Schemes who had worked on identifying the couple.

During the hearing, the judge specifically inquired where the journalists had submitted the information gathered after identifying the Russian nationals.

“I explained that we simply published our investigation,” the witness said.

Yehoshyna told IWPR that her team decided to identify the man and the woman from the intercepted conversation immediately after the security service (SBU) released it publicly.

"We were outraged by that excerpt because it seemed so shocking, unacceptable and hard to believe – the casual way these two people discussed potential future rapes with such levity,” Valeria said.

The journalists reached out to sources within the SBU who provided them with the mobile phone numbers from which the conversation had been recorded. This became the first lead in their identification efforts.

“We tried several methods, one of which involved social media,” Yehoshyna continued. ‘This allowed us to identify and confirm that the individuals were Olga and Roman Bykovsky. It was an extremely fast investigation – we were highly motivated. After that, we delved deeper to uncover who these people really were.” 

The investigation’s high profile then provided the impetus for authorities to launch a criminal case against Bykovska, a Russian citizen.

“Following the initiation [of criminal proceedings], I, as a Ukrainian citizen, was formally summoned as a witness and provided the publicly available information through official channels,” Yehoshyna said. “This is how the law enforcement system functions – they can launch investigations and register them with the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations based on media reports. They can then proceed with a formal investigation and, if needed, reach out to journalists.”

Electronic Evidence

Prosecutor Safarian told IWPR that Yehoshyna was the sole witness in the case.

“The crime was committed in a way that makes it extremely difficult to find other witnesses – if any even exist,” he continued. “None have been identified. So we have only one witness, who has already been questioned.” 

Bykovsky is not considered to have any status in the case.

“[Bykovska] actively incited her husband to commit a crime. However, it remains unclear whether he actually committed the crime or not. The area was under occupation, and no evidence has been found to confirm that the crime took place. However, her calls for violence are, in themselves, a crime under Article 438 of Ukraine’s criminal code. We have charged her with ‘preparation’ because, legally, urging someone to commit a crime is considered preparation to commit that crime,” Safarian said.

Bykovska has been placed on national, international and Interpol wanted lists.

“The trial is proceeding in absentia. If she is located in a country that is part of Interpol, she can be detained and extradited to Ukraine to face justice,” said Safarian.  

The next court hearing is scheduled for March 24, during which audio and video evidence will be examined. Following this, the defence will have the opportunity to present its own evidence. 

If found guilty, Bykovska faces a prison sentence of eight to 12 years, which will be counted from the moment of her arrest.