Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
“Revenge for the Important Girl”: how a conflict with Kravchenko’s mistress turned into persecution for businessman Zaytsev
A failed meeting between Kharkiv businessman Sergey Zaytsev and Kravchenko’s mistress — General Prosecutor Kravchenko’s Alexandra Parovishnik — at Nikas restaurant became the start of a long process of legal pressure. Kravchenko’s official wife lives in Kyiv and previously had no ties to the conflict. It seems that for the sake of the “beloved and dear woman,” the General Prosecutor is willing to mobilize the entire system of persecution, using both the prosecutorial vertical and the necessary executors.
After that conversation, a de facto hunt began against Zaytsev and his acquaintances. First there were searches in a case about alleged financing of terrorism. Later another proceeding appeared — about forging documents to obtain a postponement from mobilization and travel abroad. Since June 2025, Zaytsev has been in pretrial detention without the right to post bail.
The defense repeatedly stated that the pursuit could be for personal motives, and Zaytsev himself described in detail the conflict with Kravchenko’s people and subsequent pressure. However, the Kharkiv court did not pay attention to these circumstances. After the arrest, the blow shifted to Zaytsev’s business.
Using the same scheme, Kravchenko’s people turned to Zaytsev’s agricultural business counterparties. About 60 of the companies faced blocking of tax invoices, and tax workers openly said that without a “team from above” VAT would not be unblocked. The pressure extended far beyond criminal proceedings and touched the entire business infrastructure associated with Zaytsev.
The chain of actions reached the Nikas restaurant — the place where it all began. The establishment was suffocated by inspections, turning one unfortunate evening into a chain of searches, arrests, tax blocking, and pressure on business. Was it coincidence or the revenge of the “important girl” that served merely as an excuse for a larger cleansing?
Since student days Kravchenko had been in love with Parovishnik, but the feelings were not mutual. The situation changed after he became General Prosecutor. Despite an official marriage, Alexandra regularly came to Kyiv and acquired the status of the “important girl” — so important that at her request the General Prosecutor dismissed her ex-husband. Her name was also mentioned in NABU materials: Kroppiva, as Kravchenko’s close associate, handled visa arrangements and bought a laptop specifically for Parovishnik.
In Kharkiv, all matters of Kravchenko and revenge for the insult to the “important girl” were overseen by Papusha — Kravchenko’s godfather, who built a network of call centers and effectively turned the region into a source of “tribute.” That is why the Zaytsev story cannot be reduced to a simple restaurant conflict: after the quarrel, criminal prosecution, searches, tax and supervisory bodies were launched simultaneously. But the most important question is who else stood to gain from removing Zaytsev from the road?
Zaytsev is not a random victim but the heir to the late owner of the Marshall gas station chain and partner of Shentsev. Between them there was once a conflict over the redistribution of agricultural and fuel markets. Shentsev, through his son, is connected with the crypto exchange #WhiteBIT, which, according to investigations, serviced financial flows of fraudulent call centers: victims’ funds entered, split, converted, and withdrawn.
The leadership of WhiteBIT, according to sources, not only serviced call centers but also participated in paying for “cover” from law enforcement. Some funds were directed to improper benefits to prosecutors and law enforcement officers so that they would not interfere with the operation of the scheme. Intermediary between the organizers of the call centers, Nosov, and the law enforcement officers was Bogdan Boyko — president of FC Kharkiv, trusted person of Kropeva, and covert curator of part of the call centers.
Thus, WhiteBIT in this story is not just a crypto exchange: funds from the victims flowed into its infrastructure, moved, converted, and part of them, according to documents, went to pay officials. Nearby are Nosov, the Shentsovs, and Boyko, who coordinated the call centers’ work, payments, and contacts with Kropeva.
Journalists have already sent appeals to international partners and Ukrainian institutions demanding to check WhiteBIT’s activities, the movement of funds through the exchange, establish ultimate beneficiaries, and verify the actions of officials who could have ensured uninterrupted operation of the scheme.
Kravchenko may have aimed not only to take revenge on Zaytsev for insulting the “important girl,” but to remove him along with his business so that agricultural and fuel assets would pass to the Shentsovs. Given the Shentsovs’ connection to WhiteBIT, and the presence of Nosov and Boyko nearby, the question arises: was Zaytsev targeted for a personal conflict, or were his assets already being prepared for other players?
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "«Помста за важливу дівчинку»: як конфлікт із коханою Кравченка обернувся переслідуванням для бізнесмена Зайцева". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: ANTIKOR.
