Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Seven Victims, Legal Rifle, and Fleeing Police: What We Know About the Terror Attack in Holosiyivskyi

Dmitry Vasilchenkov, a 58-year-old Moscow native with a criminal background, obtained a confirmed weapons permit in December 2025 — and in April shot seven people. The investigation is now examining both the doctors who signed the medical certificate and the police officers who fled the scene.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 20, 2026 · 2 min read

Seven Victims, Legal Rifle, and Fleeing Police: What We Know About the Terror Attack in Holosiyivskyi
Віталій Кличко (Фото: Київська міська рада)

Seven people killed, four in intensive care — this was the toll of the terrorist attack in Kyiv's Holosiyivsky district by the evening of April 20, two days after it occurred. According to Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko, among the wounded still in hospitals is a child; two adults are being treated in the trauma department.

How it happened

Based on a reconstruction of events presented by National Police Chief Ivan Vyhivskyi, the attack began with a domestic dispute. Fifty-eight-year-old Dmytro Vasylchenko quarreled with his neighbor and shot him with a traumatic pistol. He then returned to his apartment, set it on fire with flammable liquid, took a carbine, and went out onto the street.

"He shot at close range with single shots; people had almost no chance. He would approach and shoot."

— Interior Minister Igor Klymenko

After Demiyivska Street, the attacker entered a supermarket and took hostages. Forty minutes of negotiations yielded no results. KORD special forces proceeded with an assault — and eliminated Vasylchenko after he killed another person inside the store.

Who he was

Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko confirmed: Vasylchenko was born in Moscow, a Ukrainian citizen, born in 1968, a military pensioner. In the burnt apartment, investigators found documents in Russian. On social media, he left, according to police, "rather negative" posts — "one could not say he held the position of a Ukrainian."

Previously, Vasylchenko had been prosecuted for causing minor bodily harm, but reconciled with the victim in court, and the proceedings were closed. This did not serve as grounds for revoking his weapons permit. On December 15, 2025, he successfully completed the renewal process — and received a permit for the carbine with which he would later kill people.

Two failures in one day

Alongside the tragedy of victims, the investigation has recorded two institutional failures. The first is the weapons permit system: police have launched an inspection of the medical facility that issued Vasylchenko a certificate despite his criminal history and, according to neighbors' testimony, his withdrawn and unstable character.

The second concerns the actions of patrol officers at the scene. A video appeared online showing two police officers who responded to the call fleeing from the terrorist to their patrol car without firing a single warning shot. The head of the Patrol Police Department, Yevhen Zhukov, submitted his resignation. Both officers have been suspended from duty, and a criminal investigation has been launched. Minister Klymenko called their actions "a shame for the entire system."

  • Criminal proceedings — under Part 3 of Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (terrorist act resulting in loss of life)
  • Departmental investigation into patrol officers' actions — under Klymenko's personal supervision
  • Separate inspection of the medical facility that signed the permit certificate in December 2025
  • Zelensky announced "personnel decisions across the entire Interior Ministry hierarchy"

The real question will arise after the investigations conclude: if it turns out that the medical certificate was issued in violation of regulations — will this become grounds for a systemic review of weapons permit issuance criteria, or will it be limited to punishing the specific physician.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026