TL;DR
Get everyday essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
The Riga City Court sentenced Polina Kamleva to six years in prison for financing an armed conflict, according to a report by Delfi cited by Meduza. Investigators said a €43 transfer was intended to help buy a drone-jamming device for Russian forces; Kamleva denied having criminal intent, and her sentence was below the eight years sought by prosecutors.
Riga City Court has sentenced Polina Kamleva, a resident of Rēzekne, to six years in prison for financing an armed conflict, according to Latvian outlet Delfi, as cited by Meduza on October 8. Investigators said a transfer worth about €43 was intended to help buy a drone-jamming device for Russian forces; Kamleva told the court she had no intention of financing the Russian army.
The case concerned 157 Belarusian rubles, reported as about €43, sent from a personal account by an acquaintance of Kamleva who lives in Belarus. Investigators said Kamleva asked him to make the transfer on her behalf because payments from Latvian banks to Russian banks were not possible. They linked the money to a planned purchase of a mobile electronic warfare system intended for Russian forces.
According to investigators cited by Delfi, the events began with a WhatsApp exchange in December 2024. An acquaintance in Russia associated with the Kaskad military-patriotic center allegedly asked Kamleva to help raise money for military equipment for the Russian army. Investigators said she then contacted the person in Belarus about sending the money. The State Security Service detained Kamleva in December 2025.
In her final statement to the court, Kamleva disputed that the messages established an intention to support Russian forces. She said she was unemployed and experiencing serious psychological distress when asked for help. Prosecutors had requested an eight-year sentence. Latvian law allows a prison term of up to 10 years for financing an armed conflict, according to the source report.
A Small Transfer, A Serious Charge
The sentence shows that Latvian authorities treated the transfer not simply as a small personal payment but as alleged support for military equipment connected to an armed conflict. The court’s decision assigns substantial criminal consequences to the purpose investigators attributed to the funds, despite the amount being about €43.
The case also highlights the importance of evidence about intent. Investigators relied on messages and the route of the payment to argue that the money was meant for equipment for Russian troops. Kamleva challenged that interpretation. The source report does not provide the full judgment or the court’s detailed reasoning, so the evidence and legal findings behind the sentence cannot be independently assessed from the information available here.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Investigators Traced the Payment
Delfi reported that Kamleva was a member of the Latvian Russian Union Party when she was detained. Meduza described her as a pro-Russian activist, attributing that characterization to Delfi. Those descriptions are background reported by the outlets; they do not, on their own, establish the facts of the criminal charge.
The prosecution’s account centers on a sequence of contacts: a request from an acquaintance linked to the Kaskad military-patriotic center, Kamleva’s alleged approach to a contact in Belarus, and a transfer made from that contact’s account. Investigators said this arrangement was used because transfers from Latvian banks to Russian banks were unavailable. The court convicted Kamleva of financing an armed conflict; the reporting provided does not say that she personally bought or delivered the equipment.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Evidence and Appeal Status Unknown
The available report does not specify the sentencing date, whether Kamleva plans to appeal, or whether the judgment can still be appealed. It also does not give the court’s full explanation of how it assessed the messages, the transfer, and Kamleva’s claim that she lacked criminal intent.
The stated purpose of the payment is the investigators’ account as reported by Delfi and Meduza. Kamleva disputed that interpretation in court. The source material does not include a response from her lawyer, the full prosecution case, or additional detail about the planned equipment purchase, so those points remain unclear.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Appeal and Judgment Details
The next developments to watch are whether Kamleva challenges the conviction or sentence and whether further court documents or reporting clarify the judges’ reasoning. The source report does not identify a filing deadline, appeal court, or scheduled hearing, so no date for a possible next proceeding is confirmed.
Any appeal would be important to the case’s outcome, particularly given the dispute over intent. Until more information is available, the confirmed reported result is a six-year prison sentence, with the prosecution having sought eight years and the statutory maximum described in the report as 10 years.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What sentence did Polina Kamleva receive?
The Riga City Court sentenced her to six years in prison for financing an armed conflict, according to Delfi as cited by Meduza.
What was the €43 transfer for, according to investigators?
Investigators said the payment was intended to help buy a drone-jamming device or mobile electronic warfare system for Russian forces. Kamleva denied intending to finance the Russian army.
Who sent the money?
According to the report, an acquaintance of Kamleva who lives in Belarus transferred 157 Belarusian rubles, reported as about €43, from his personal account.
Did Kamleva admit to financing Russian forces?
No. In her final statement, she said her actions were wrong but denied having criminal intent or intending to support the Russian army.
Will Kamleva appeal the sentence?
The available report does not say whether she plans to appeal or give details about any appeal deadline or hearing.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
