An inquest into the suspected self-inflicted death of a Russian-born gun and Nazi “fanatic” who “supported the actions” of mosque terrorist Brenton Tarrant is underway in Christchurch.
Artemiy Vldimirovich Dubovskiy, known as Troy, died after a stand-off with armed police at a suburban Christchurch park in March 2019, just 12 days after the terror attack that left 51 worshippers dead at two city mosques.
The day before, police had raided the 54-year-old’s St Martins home after a tip-off from a member of the public.
Officers found a cache of firearms, including a modified semi-automatic weapon, ammunition and “violent extremist content”, along with Nazi uniforms, helmets and clothing.
Dubovskiy, who had spent time in jail for a violent home invasion where he put a replica German World War II Luger pistol to a man’s head, did not return to his home after work the day it was raided by police.
He was found inside his parked silver Mitsubishi Pajero in a cul-de-sac in the Richmond area of the city at around 12.30am the next day.
Dubovskiy was soon surrounded by Armed Offenders Squad (AOS) members, police dogs, a police Negotiation Team and a circling police Eagle helicopter above.
At around 3.40am, after a prolonged stand-off, officers approached the vehicle and found Dubovskiy critically injured.
Immediate first aid was given but Dubovskiy died at the scene.
For legal reasons, the way Dubovskiy died cannot be reported.
Soon after the fatal incident, police confirmed that Dubovskiy first came to their notice after he sent “some concerning emails” that included references to the Christchurch terror attacks.
“Based on the nature of the items located during the search warrant, the nature of what he said to police during the negotiation and subsequent inquiries, police are of the view that Mr Dubovskiy did pose a significant threat to the community,” then-Canterbury District Commander Superintendent John Price said at the time.
“Based on inquiries to date it is clear that Mr Dubovskiy supported the actions of the man charged with murder in relation to the Christchurch terror attacks, however, no connection has been established between the two.”
Price confirmed search warrants were executed on three properties that Dubovskiy, who arrived in New Zealand in 1997, lived at or had access to.
“A number of items of concern were located at these properties, including firearms, ammunition and violent extremist content,” he said.
This week, Coroner Heather McKenzie is holding an inquest into Dubovskiy’s death.
She opened the inquest by acknowledging his family’s loss and the “very difficult and unusual circumstances” for them since his death.
“I also want to acknowledge that the evidence and the questions that we might hear or ask over the next fortnight may be confronting and difficult,” she said.
“But I want to assure you that I don’t lose sight of that for … Mr Dubovskiy’s family and friends, there is a family member and a friend at the centre of these proceedings.”
Coroner McKenzie said the main purpose of the inquest was to determine the circumstances of Dubovskiy’s death and to consider whether there were any recommendations she could make “to help prevent future deaths occurring in similar circumstances”.
“As we traverse these various matters … I don’t lose sight that at the heart of this is Mr Dubovskiy … your family member and other people’s friend.”
Joshua Shaw, counsel assisting Coroner McKenzie, outlined in court the lead-up to Dubovskiy’s death and his final moments.
“Any untimely death, no matter the circumstances, is tragic, and it is something that we should strive to learn from,” he said.
“We will hear evidence over the course of the inquiry regarding extremist views that Mr Dubovskiy appears to have held; we’ll hear about weapons and ammunition and other items of concern that were located at his address and related evidence.
“But that side of Mr Dubovskiy was not known or prominent, at least to everyone in his life … family members, friends, acquaintances may have seen him and appear to have known him in a different way, in a different context – to them, he was remembered as a family man, as a father figure, as someone who had endured a fair bit of hardship in his life but who was trying to move forward and change his life if he could."
Shaw explained that the inquest was an inquisitorial process – an opportunity “to try and understand” what happened to Dubovskiy, rather than “to blame, attack or try and attach any kind of ill will towards any party”.
The inquest was not a place for the police to prosecute Dubovskiy or for his family to defend him.
“Mr Dubovskiy died 12 days after … perhaps the darkest day in this nation’s history,” Shaw said.
“On the 15th of March, 51 Shahid lost their lives in the terror attacks on two Christchurch mosques and that was a tragedy that not only shocked our nation and the global community, but also a tragedy that put our nation … on high alert regarding what could follow … was there a wider terror network that needed to be of concern? Was there the possibility of copycat attacks? What needed to be done to protect other innocent victims from harm or from death?
“All of those questions and many, many more were very acute in that period … the national threat level was increased by the Prime Minister to high, for the first time in our nation’s history … and that is an important context for what occurred with Mr Dubovskiy.”
Shaw said it was in that climate that Dubovskiy became a “person of interest” to police.
“He was one of many who were being assessed as persons of interest – but the information the police had relating to Mr Dubovskiy was of sufficient concern that action was necessary,” he said.
“And so on … the day before he passed, a search warrant was executed at Mr Dubovskiy’s address … items of significant concern were located … it became an immediate priority, and imperative to find Mr Dubovskiy.
“And because of the threat climate, because of the potential threat that police perceived that Mr Dubovskiy might present, there were very specialist police teams involved, including the Armed Offenders Squad and the Special Tactics Group.
“Mr Dubovskiy had said to a family member that he would not be going to prison, that he was not going to be taken in, and that he was intent on potentially taking his own life – and so the police negotiation team also became involved with a view to reaching Mr Dubovskiy by phone … and seeing if some resolution of the situation could be arrived at.”
Shaw said during the standoff, Dubovskiy remained in his vehicle. The negotiator connected with him at 12.38am.
“The immediate response from Mr Dubovskiy ... was to say that it was best for the police to kill him, to take him out, as he would not be giving up or going to jail,” he told the court.
“The negotiator responded that nobody needs to get hurt, that there was a way to resolve things peacefully. And what followed was a lengthy and sometimes wide-ranging conversation covering family, politics, the state of New Zealand society, a little bit about Mr Dubovskiy’s personal background.
“And during that time he was speaking quite freely … his manner, his willingness to talk, his focus on family, among other things, led the police negotiators and others to form the view that they should continue the conversation … That first call lasted almost two hours and … may have been cut off only because of the phone at Mr Dubovskiy’s end possibly running low on battery.”
Shaw said during the call, it became clear Dubovskiy was using a second phone to communicate with family.
He told them that he was injured and bleeding, but when asked by police, he denied that he needed any medical attention.
Shaw said police had three calls with Dubovskiy and based on the dialogue, three likely outcomes were being considered – a negotiated surrender, Dubovskiy self-harming or taking his own life and a “tactical response” in which specialist officers would “move on” the vehicle.
By 3am, police calls were no longer going through to Dubovskiy.
“After some movement inside the vehicle, he seemed to slump backward and then slump forward over the steering wheel,” Shaw said.
“Blood was sighted, and there was a very real concern that he may have self-harmed in a significant way.”
Shaw said that brought the situation “to a head” and as police approached Dubovskiy’s car on foot, he “sat up” in his seat and “things happened very quickly”.
Tear gas was deployed into his car, and he was “extracted”.
It was clear Dubovskiy was “not in a good way”.
Despite the efforts of paramedics at the scene, he was soon pronounced dead.
Shaw said Dubovskiy’s cause of death was “consistent with a self -inflicted injury”.
After hearing all of the evidence, Coroner McKenzie will make a formal ruling on whether Dubovskiy’s death was a suicide.
She is also tasked with addressing a number of other issues, including whether any “action or inaction” by police in relation to locating and handling Dubovskiy before his death was appropriate.
Shaw reiterated that Dubovskiy died 12 days after “the horrible terror attacks”, which was important context.
“There are two sides to that contextual coin – from the police perspective, is that with the knowledge that they had of Mr Dubovskiy, with the items that were found at his address, with other concerning information, the police needed to exercise extreme caution in engaging with him and account for any possibility,” he said.
“The other side of the coin, from the family perspective, is … whether that extremely high alert level may have resulted in the police taking a heavy-handed or an overly aggressive approach that unduly brought the standoff to a head, culminating in Mr Dubovskiy’s death.
“And a related question posed by the family is whether there may have been delays in Mr Dubovskiy receiving medical attention, such that potentially life-saving assistance could not be rendered.”
Shaw said the inquest was not about Dubovskiy’s extremist views or “whether he planned to act on any of those views” or whether there was “a proper basis for the search warrants”.
Over the next two weeks, Coroner McKenzie will hear from 11 witnesses – all of whom were police officers at the time of the death.
She will hear from the officer who located Dubovskiy’s car in the park; officers involved in the tactical response, standoff and negotiations and senior police who can “contextualise the threat assessment” and help the coroner “understand what the threat climate was like at the time”.
Crown prosecutor Pip Currie is representing police at the inquest.
“His death was not the outcome that the police wanted,” she said.
“The police do need for the Dubovskiy family to get answers to the questions that they have regarding the surrounding circumstances – and it’s hoped that this inquest will go some way towards achieving that.”
A member of Dubovskiy’s family is also in court and will have a chance to ask questions of police.
They said Dubovskiy was “a very helpful person” who was “always there for you”.
The man had “trauma and mental health issues” but was working for a family business and was “quite stable as a person” at the time of his death.
“He was a very hard-working person,” the family member said.
“I never heard about any plans from him about any terrorism.”
They believed that while Dubovskiy may have “seemed hostile”, there was “a good chance” he would have surrendered.
Currie said it was important to remember that at the time of Dubovskiy’s death, following the terror attack, “copycat or revenge attacks” were “of significant concern and very much at the forefront” of police operations.
She said prevention of further incidents was an extreme priority, and because information gained about Dubovskiy during the search warrants suggested he was “favourably aligned with the mosque attack”, there was a “rapid” response.
During his calls with the negotiators, it was clear Dubovskiy “wasn’t going to give up”.
“He wanted to say goodbye, to go to jail … he was military-trained,” she said.
“Despite the police goal being to negotiate a peaceful outcome, it did not [eventuate].”
The officer who located Dubovskiy’s car was the first to give evidence.
He told the court that following the terror attack the mood in Christchurch was “very tense” and police had a “heightened” sense of security and “looking after each other”.
He revealed that a briefing was held for officers working after Dubovskiy’s home was raided and the hunt for him was underway.
He recalled being told Dubovskiy was “planning a mass casualty”.
“Some firearms had been found with certain writings that linked back to previous mass casualty shootings - something written or inscribed on the firearms.”
The officer who located Dubovskiy’s car was the first to give evidence.
He told the court that following the terror attack the mood in Christchurch was “very tense” and police had a “heightened” sense of security and “looking after each other”.
He revealed that a briefing was held for officers working after Dubovskiy’s home was raided and the hunt for him was underway.
He recalled being told Dubovskiy was “planning a mass casualty”.
“(And) that he possessed high-power firearms and that plan was close to being put into action,” he said.
“I believe some firearms had been found with some writing that linked back to previous mass shootings - something written or inscribed on the firearms.”
The second witness was the officer in charge of the Special Tactics Group at the time.
He told the court that once Dubovskiy had been located and contained in the park, he radioed his team and said:
“I updated fire orders to my team… the offender poses a grave risk to the public and police, he is contained… He cannot be allowed to leave. Take proportionate action to arrest or prevent his escape,” he recalled.
“At 1:32 am, (a) police negotiation team member provides a progress report. He believes there is an 80% chance Dubovskiy will surrender.
“At 2.39am he is seen by my staff reaching into the rear of the vehicle, he then begins revving the engine.”
He said just before 3am the officer said Dubovskiy told police:
“I can’t understand how you got onto me because I didn’t post online. I’m not as stupid as Tarrant.”
“He states he won’t go to prison,” the officer explained.
“He’s aware there are snipers deployed and that he won’t get out.”
From 3.09am Dubovskiy was “moving around inside his vehicle”.
“At 3.30am the police negotiation team advised that… they can no longer communicate with him,” he said.
“They have been talking to him for some three hours. While he is communicative, he has made no demands or concessions and the negotiation team has built up trust with him to the extent that when calls have ended, he has rung them back.
“He appears to have self-harmed and wants suicide by cop.”
The officer said Dubovskiy was “suffering from and taking meds for PTSD” and “possibly been streaming video from the vehicle”.
At 3.36am police deployed a light operational vehicle towards Dubovskiy’s car. They were unable to advise him beforehand.
“At 3.38am Dubovskiy opens the driver’s door and starts to get out, but suddenly shuts the door again,” the officer said.
“My STG staff nearby begin direct voice appeals to him.
“At 3.41am Dubovskiy is looking around the outside of the vehicle, then under the dash. Then his head slumped back on the seat and possible self-harm reported.”
Police were sent to check on Dubovskiy and as they approached he “suddenly sits up”.
“I instruct staff on the ground to deploy (tear) gas. He is still in the vehicle, he is still a significant threat,” the officer said.
“Special tactics group staff moved forward and immediately extracted Dubovskiy from his vehicle.”
Paramedics went straight to the injured man but his injuries were fatal.
Police later confirmed no explosive devices or firearms were found in Dubovskiy’s vehicle.
Dubovskiy’s parents, father Vlad Dubovskiy and mother Inna Georgiyevna, spoke to the Herald before his funeral in 2019.
“Our life is now completely broken,” his father said.
He denied that his son had been in the Soviet Army and said earlier claims by his son’s friends that he had served in the Russian special forces and had fought in Afghanistan and Chechnya were incorrect.
He said Dubovskiy was chief of security at a Russian bank before he left his homeland.
But he admitted that his son was “fanatical” about firearms and military history, particularly World War II memorabilia and had a “private” collection of Nazi things in his home.
“Before fascism, it was the National Socialist Party and it was different to fascism. And my son was a collector … German people were attractive to him. There is nothing illegal about that,” he said.
“I don’t know what police were worried about. [Troy] never gave any indication or reason to use these weapons. He never shoot [sic] these weapons. They were just his collection.”
Vlad Dubovskiy said before moving to New Zealand, his family had lived and worked in Crimea and Uzbekistan, “where a lot of Muslims lived”.
“There was never any conflict, nothing. It was just normal relationships,” he told the Herald.
“There was never any differences between people. In Soviet people, all people, all religions, all people are friendly to each other. So for us, it’s normal.”
Vlad Dubovskiy wasn’t aware of any red flags before police raided his son’s house.
“It was a big, horrible surprise for us,” he said.
At the age of 35, Dubovskiy was found guilty by a jury at Christchurch District Court of aggravated burglary and unlawful possession of an imitation firearm.
He was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment.
Dubovskiy had burgled a Russian couple he knew, court documents show.
When the pair returned to their home on October 22, 1999, they noticed signs of an intruder.
Armed and balaclava-clad, Dubovskiy confronted the Russians.
Dubovskiy pointed a replica Luger, a German pistol well-known for its use during World War II, at the man’s head.
Believing the pistol to be real, the man grappled with Dubovskiy for the gun before escaping with his wife.
The Armed Offenders Squad was alerted, but it was not until two days later that Dubovskiy surrendered himself to police with the assistance of a friend and his father.
In his statement to police, Dubovskiy admitted he was the intruder but said he could not recall many aspects of the incident because he was drunk.
Dubovskiy has several other convictions, including for firearms offences and assaulting a police officer, and was on bail at the time of the home invasion.
His last offence was in June 2013, the Herald understands.
Anna Leask is a senior journalist who covers national crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2008 and has worked as a journalist for more than 20 years with a particular focus on family and gender-based violence, child abuse, sexual violence, homicides, mental health and youth crime. She writes, hosts and produces the award-winning podcast A Moment In Crime, released monthly on nzherald.co.nz