Rapper Guf Faces Robbery Charges Over Brawl

Details provided by the investigation paint a picture of a sudden escalation at a local wellness facility. The rapper and a friend were reportedly enjoying their leisure time when a conflict erupted with another visitor. This disagreement quickly devolved into a physical confrontation, drawing the attention of those nearby.

During this chaotic exchange, the prosecution alleges that Dolmatov and his associate forcibly subdued the opponent. The primary objective of this aggression was the seizure of personal property. Specifically, the iPhone belonging to the victim was taken directly from him during the scuffle.

The charges reflect the severity of the alleged actions:

• Initiation of a physical fight in a public establishment
• Use of force against another individual
• Unlawful seizure of personal electronic devices
• Classification as a violent robbery under criminal law

The initiation of the trial marks a significant development in the legal exposure facing the rap artist. The specific charge of robbery with violence carries substantial weight within the Russian legal framework. It implies not just the taking of property, but the active use of physical force to achieve that goal.

Investigators have formally presented their version of the events to the court, establishing the narrative that the iPhone was not surrendered willingly. The presence of a second individual, identified as a friend of the accused, complicates the legal assessment of the incident, potentially introducing charges of complicity or group activity.

According to the version of the investigation, the artist and a friend, resting in a bath complex, staged a fight and took an iPhone from the opponent.

The court must now weigh these allegations against the defense's position, determining whether the events constituted a criminal act of theft or a different form of dispute resolution.

Alexey Dolmatov, known to his fans simply as Guf, has long been a prominent figure in the Russian hip-hop scene. His career has spanned decades, often characterized by a specific lyrical style and public image. However, this current legal battle introduces a stark contrast to his artistic persona.

The location of the alleged crime, a suburban bath complex, suggests a private moment of relaxation that spiraled into public legal trouble. Such incidents often draw intense media scrutiny, bridging the gap between celebrity status and criminal accountability.

Key elements of the current situation include:

• The venue: A bath complex in the Moscow region
• The participants: The rapper, a friend, and an alleged victim
• The object: A mobile phone (iPhone)
• The status: The criminal case is now under judicial review

The investigative committee has finalized its preliminary work and handed the dossier over to the judiciary. Their findings rely on the testimony of the victim and available evidence from the scene. The core of their argument rests on the sequence of events: a fight followed by the taking of the device.

While the specific details of the violence are described generally as a potasovka (brawl/scuffle), the legal classification hinges on the outcome—the loss of the iPhone. The prosecution must prove that the intent to steal the phone was present and that violence was the means used to secure it.

The court is now tasked with examining the evidence to determine the exact nature of the robbery and the degree of involvement of each party present during the bathhouse incident.

The trial of Guf represents a high-profile legal test for the celebrity. As the court reviews the criminal case, the outcome will determine the legal consequences for the rapper regarding the alleged robbery. The proceedings in the Moscow region will continue to follow the strict protocols of criminal justice.

Ultimately, the court must decide if the evidence supports the claim that Alexey Dolmatov and his associate committed robbery through violence. This case serves as a reminder that legal accountability applies regardless of public status, particularly when involving violent crimes and the seizure of property.