Semyon Varlamov's emotionally charged civil trial continues as ex-girlfriend testifies

It was a roller coaster of emotions today as Colorado Avalanche goaltender Semyon Varlamov’s civil trial with ex-girlfriend Evgeniya Vavrinyuk continued after it began yesterday with jury selection and the beginning of Vavrinyuk’s testimony.

As court was preparing to come into session, both sides departed into a side room, fueling speculation that a settlement was in the works.

Approximately two hours later, both parties emerged, no settlement completed, and the defense immediately moved for a mistrial and dismissal of the case with prejudice (which would essentially end the potential for a future claim in regards to this specific incident) because Vavrinyuk’s testimony yesterday included a violation of a court order, one of several instances in which the plaintiff’s team had violated a court directive in this case. Penalties accrued already include the cost of attorney and court fees for the plaintiff.

The judge, Morris Hoffman, “reluctantly” dismissed the mistrial and dismissal requests after citing similar civil suits in which the cases were allowed to go on despite the violations. Judge Hoffman also cited significant pacing concerns and scolded the plaintiffs for their plodding ways, a sight that would become familiar throughout the day’s proceedings as the plaintiff’s team frequently drew the ire of the judge.

Vavrinyuk then took the stand in a continuation of her testimony from yesterday and described the alleged incident that took place in October, 2013. The two attended a party featuring the majority of the Colorado Avalanche and their girlfriends and wives at the Chophouse on October 28, 2013. The two argued throughout the evening as Vavrinyuk wanted to dance, play games, and take pictures with Varlamov, saying she saw Varlamov drink “a lot of beer,” but Varlamov was distant and more interested in looking at his phone and did not want to take pictures with Vavrinyuk. She stated he was acting this way because he was drunk.

Vavrinyuk continued that Varlamov then went to the bathroom and she followed, saying she, “Just wanted to fix the situation. It was not my goal to peek at someone,” as she entered the men’s bathroom. She then left the party alone after midnight and returned home to the apartment the couple shared and went to sleep.

Varlamov would return at 6 a.m. the following morning, the 29th, appearing drunk in a suit that was dirty, torn, and had blood on it. Vavrinyuk testified that she began crying, saying Varlamov looked like an alcoholic, not a goaltender.

Vavrinyuk said she believed Varlamov poured water on the bed and when she grabbed a blanket to cover the wet spot so she could go back to sleep, Varlamov attempted to take the blanket from her. Vavrinyuk then tried to get it back, setting off the physical contact portion of the altercation.

Vavrinyuk then “pushed him in the face with open hands,” to which Varlamov responded by kicking her in the chest, causing her to fall backward and hit her head on the nightstand. Varlamov then pinned her down, refusing to allow her to get up as he reportedly outweighed her by approximately 70 pounds.

After getting up, Varlamov then grabbed her by the hair and pulled her back to the floor, asking, “What are you doing, bitch?” and causing her to kick and scream because she, “Felt like [her] scalp was going to come off,” repeatedly screaming, “Don’t beat me up.”

Varlamov went on to state, “I am a public person. I do not need these problems. You can call 911.” Vavrinyuk, when asked if she felt this was a threat, responded by accusing Varlamov of saying, “If we were not in America, I could kill you,” though Vavrinyuk testified that she didn’t think he would kill her, he was just being aggressive. She said she, “Felt terrible. It turned out he didn’t need me,” and after being released, she grabbed her phone to call her sister.

Varlamov then grabbed the phone and as Vavrinyuk chased him around the apartment, began laughing, “like he was playing with me,” and then he went into the second bedroom after leaving her phone on the couch. She didn’t realize the phone was on the couch and followed him into the second bedroom to get his phone. When she tried to leave the room with it, he blocked the door, squeezing her leg in the door until she let go of the phone. She then tried to run from the room and Varlamov pushed her out and closed the door. Vavrinyuk then went to sleep in the master bedroom.

She awoke at 10 a.m. and went to school but returned home shortly after not feeling well and found Varlamov sleeping. When he awoke, she left, calling a friend to tell her what happened. They then went to the law office of Robert Abrams, who was the friend’s husband, and began to formulate a legal plan. Vavrinyuk later returned to Varlamov’s apartment to gather her things but was not allowed entry and overheard Varlamov talking on the phone in Russian, asking if he should go to the police first.

Vavrinyuk then left, stayed the night at Abrams’ house, and went to police the next day, October 30. The police sent her to Denver Health and assuaged her fears over hospital fees and pictures of her injuries were taken. The pictures were shown to the court but ultimately were too dark to discern much.

When asked why she ultimately decided to go to the police, Vavrinyuk offered up, “I wanted the person that I loved to be punished. I wanted justice. If you’re a public person, you have to be more responsible than common people. You have to answer for your actions.”

After describing Vavrinyuk’s difficulties coping with the incident, her attorneys, namely Olaf Muller, then began focusing their line of questioning on Abrams and his behavior as her attorney. Muller inquired about the multiple media interviews done by Vavrinyuk for Russian TV and local news alike with Vavrinyuk stating Abrams was the man behind the curtain all along, setting up the interviews and receiving payments for them. She said she was unaware she would be getting paid for the interviews but estimated she received only 30-35% of the money Abrams ultimately made off of them.

Vavrinyuk stated multiple times the interviews were not her idea and she did not want to do them but was simply following the advice of Abrams, her lawyer. Abrams would later act on her behalf and make other decisions without her permission that she was unhappy about. Abrams later sent her an invoice for $15,000, leading to his termination as her lawyer.

Vavrinyuk burst into tears when describing the moment she learned the District Attorney was dismissing the criminal case, going so far as to say she, “didn’t want to live,” and was taken to a hospital after making that statement. She continued crying through a series of questions before a brief recess was called to allow her to compose herself.

Upon returning to the court, Vavrinyuk would state that she received a number of death threats and threats of rape on the Russian version of Facebook from Russian-speaking fans of Team Russia’s hockey team as they were in preparation for the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics in which Varlamov was set to participate. She said these threats were her primary reason for not returning to Russia after the incident. Shortly after, the plaintiff had exhausted his questions for Vavrinyuk, opening the door for cross-examination.

The defense wasted no time attacking inconsistencies in Vavrinyuk’s story, primarily her alleged desire to get money from Varlamov.

The defense presented a contract between Vavrinyuk and Abrams signed on October 29, 2013, that stated she intended to bring about a civil case against Varlamov,  but in an interview with Denver police on October 30,  she stated her priority was to see Varlamov punished, not to get money, but if she was able to she might try to get money. The defense then presented an interview she did with Denver police several days later in which she said she had no intention of seeking money in a civil case.

Vavrinyuk then claimed she was tricked into signing the contract with Abrams, stating her intention to seek damages via a civil case against Varlamov but that she was not tricked into bringing about the case currently being heard. She then did some back and forth about whether or not she told police she was not intending to bring about a civil case, claiming it was a mistranslation but ultimately confirming she did tell police she was not going to seek money via civil case.

The defense also keyed in on conversations Vavrinyuk had with her best friend back in Russia, who was recording them and later sold them to media outlets without Vavrinyuk’s knowledge. The most damning of the conversations had Vavrinyuk stating “Listen, I hit him very hard. He deserved it” and despite her protests that it was simply, “language between best friends,” she had no explanation for the comment. Further, she went on to say in the recording that her best friend could not tell anyone she had struck Varlamov first in the physical altercation.

The defense then asked why Vavrinyuk did not inform police she had hit Varlamov first, with her saying she did not hit him but rather, “pushed him in the face with open hands.” She then confirmed her testimony that she did not inform police that she had started the physical contact with her push. The first time she mentioned starting the physical contact was in her deposition.

Turning to the physical evidence, the defense then attacked perceived issues with the injuries she claimed took place and the physical evidence actually found when she was inspected at Denver Health on October 30. She claimed she had hurt her neck but there was no visible evidence of an injury and when tests were run, no neck injury was found and she was only determined to have “minor cuts and scratches.” Despite claiming pain, the doctors at Denver Health were unable to locate any injuries beyond minor bruising on her hands, legs, and abdominal area as well as some skin removed in the chest area. Vavrinyuk then testified she declined pain medications and only took two pills for anxiety.

The court then decided to adjourn for the day after over five hours of testimony. The trial will continue Wednesday morning as the defense continues their cross-examination.