Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Growth
15 measurements spanning 44 days, net +97. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 7,793–7,924 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
19 Sept 2026, 14:41
7,909
+28
14 Sept 2026, 21:38
7,881
+18
11 Sept 2026, 04:21
7,863
+11
6 Sept 2026, 10:36
7,852
+12
1 Sept 2026, 23:14
7,840
+2
29 Aug 2026, 13:42
7,838
+21
26 Aug 2026, 03:18
7,817
-2
22 Aug 2026, 20:19
7,819
-2
19 Aug 2026, 16:33
7,821
+5
16 Aug 2026, 18:03
7,816
-1
13 Aug 2026, 06:35
7,817
+9
10 Aug 2026, 06:34
7,808
-6
7 Aug 2026, 03:57
7,814
+2
6 Aug 2026, 06:30
7,812
no change
6 Aug 2026, 06:23
7,812
first reading
Engagement
33 posts held, back to 4 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 18 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
20.4%
avg views ÷ 7,909 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,620
4 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.18%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
4
of 33 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 August 2026
Posts held
33 (4 June 2026 – 28 August 2026)
Views total
6,462
Reactions total
141
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
28 Aug 2026, 20:26 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Reaction mix
2,280 reactions across 33 posts, in 27 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 32.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
741
32.5%
❤
595
26.1%
🔥
530
23.2%
😁
111
4.87%
🤯
85
3.73%
🤝
33
1.45%
🙈
32
1.40%
👏
28
1.23%
🙏
25
1.10%
👀
16
0.702%
🤣
14
0.614%
💯
10
0.439%
💔
7
0.307%
😎
7
0.307%
🍾
6
0.263%
🤡
6
0.263%
❤🔥
4
0.175%
👌
4
0.175%
🤬
4
0.175%
🥰
4
0.175%
7 further kinds
18
0.789%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 33 of the 33 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 2,280 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 33 most recent posts we hold, published 4 June 2026 to 28 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
12
across the posts below
Posts paid on
9
of 33 we hold a reading for · 27%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @criminaljusticio. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 33 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 4 June 2026 to 28 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
18 занятий о квалификации хищений
Большая доля «экономической» уголовки так или иначе приходится на хищения.
Есть постановления Пленума, огромный массив судебной практики и, кажется, уже всё написано в литературе. Но вопросы квалификации всё равно регулярно возникают. Поэтому я стараюсь читать всё, что выходит по преступлениям против собственности.
Недавно я давал интервью школе права «Либерфорд» (ссылка), у котор…
💰 Премия самому себе: самоуправство или присвоение?
Генерального директора акционерного общества обвиняли в том, что он незаконно выплачивал самому себе премии за счет организации.
Следствие квалифицировало его действия как присвоение в особо крупном размере (ч. 4 ст. 160 УК).
Однако суд с такой квалификацией не согласился. Он исходил из того, что директор, как и другие работники общества, имел право на получение п…
Приглашаем на вебинар |Антикоррупционные иски: гражданский vs уголовный взгляд
Авторы Telegram-канала «Национализация активов в РФ»: партнёр NSP Роман Макаров и юрист NSP Владислава Диденко, а также автор Telegram-канала «Уголовка на практике» — партнёр Feoktistov & Partners Дмитрий Данилов — проведут совместный вебинар, на котором будут разбирать дела об антикоррупционных исках.
👤 Вебинар будет интересен собственн…
👨🔬 Когда ошибки экспертов становятся проблемой всего уголовного дела
Таганский районный суд Москвы признал Т. виновным по ч. 3 ст. 285 УК. В основу обвинения и приговора, среди прочего, легло заключение комплексной технической экспертизы МГТУ «СТАНКИН».
Эксперты исследовали исполнение государственных контрактов на проведение НИОКР и пришли к выводу о несоответствии выполненных работ требованиям ГОСТ и нормативной …
Какие вопросы посещения СИЗО г. Москвы требуют приоритетного разрешения?
Организация работы центра видеосвиданий с доверителями26%
Внедрение электронного сервиса живой очереди на посещение60%
Возвращение ФСИН-ВИЗИТ51%
Оптимизация работы сервиса записи на Госуслугах35%
Иные вопросы (напишу в комментариях)3%
The shares total 175%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Кто из нас не сталкивался с проблемами посещения доверителей в московских СИЗО? Наверное, только тот, кто не пытался туда пройти. Да и те, наверняка, наслышаны об этих проблемах.
Наши коллеги из Адвокатской палаты г. Москвы принимают все возможные меры, чтобы эти проблемы стояли не так остро. Например, уже 28 августа в Мосгордуме состоится совещание по вопросу внедрения электронного сервиса ведения списка живой очер…
Сегодня и неделю назад был в заседаниях Первого кассационного суда общей юрисдикции в Саратове по делу, в котором я участвовал ни много ни мало 4,5 года. «Преступное сообщество», сплошные санитарные рубки в Московской области, 175 томов уголовного дела и много всего, что произошло за эти годы.
На первом заседании прежняя «тройка» внезапно вспомнила, что двое из трех судей уже рассматривали кассационную жалобу на при…
🫸 Когда удержание чужого имущества не образует состава преступления
Суды признали Коникову виновной по ч. 1 ст. 330 УК за то, что она, несмотря на требования потерпевших, незаконно удерживала и использовала принадлежащие им автомобиль и трактор.
Транспортными средствами Коникова пользовалась потому, что ранее они находились во владении её «гражданского» супруга, с которым она воспитывала общую дочь, вела совместное…
🏗 Застройщик не достроил, но дольщики получили квартиры: есть ли мошенничество?
Руководителей и соучредителей застройщика осудили по ч. 4 ст. 159 УК за хищение более 560 млн рублей у участников долевого строительства. По версии обвинения, они привлекли деньги более 300 граждан, создавая видимость намерения завершить строительство двух многоквартирных домов, хотя изначально не собирались исполнять принятые обязательс…
🏭 Не перечислил деньги контрагенту — еще не присвоил
Руководители управляющей компании были признаны виновными в присвоении денежных средств и злоупотреблении полномочиями.
По версии судов, на счета компании поступали платежи собственников помещений за теплоснабжение, которые подлежали перечислению ресурсоснабжающей организации. Из поступивших 364,6 млн рублей около 30 млн рублей перечислены не были: осужденные ост…
Как оспаривать «компетенцию»: делюсь документами
Коллеги, спасибо за огромный интерес ко вчерашнему посту. Получил очень много сообщений с просьбой поделиться документами, поэтому решил разместить их здесь публично.
Выкладываю:
1. Текст адвокатского запроса.
2. Ответ на аналогичный запрос.
3. Ходатайство о признании заключения специалиста недопустимым доказательством.
Документы подготовлены по разным уголовным де…
🔥60👍30❤15🤝3
Showing the 12 most recent of 33 posts we hold for @criminaljusticio. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Какие вопросы посещения СИЗО г. Москвы требуют приоритетного разрешения?
Организация работы центра видеосвиданий с доверителями26%
Внедрение электронного сервиса живой очереди на посещение60%
Возвращение ФСИН-ВИЗИТ51%
Оптимизация работы сервиса записи на Госуслугах35%
Иные вопросы (напишу в комментариях)3%
The shares total 175%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 33 most recent posts we hold, published 4 June 2026 to 28 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 6 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
Бывший следак @exsled · 41,285 Telegram ranks this channel #77 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 29 August 2026
KALOY.RU @akaloy · 53,269 Telegram ranks this channel #83 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 24 August 2026
This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 19 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Уголовка на практике” (@criminaljusticio), 7,909 subscribers as measured 19 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/criminaljusticio.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.