In the last five years of their life together, S.S. began to engage in unacceptable actions with the children.
“These actions were horrific. He systematically beat us and forced the children to be undressed together, even though the older ones were 14 and 16 at the time. He also undressed himself, took the children to the bathhouse, where he spent hours hugging and caressing them, including the girls. He forbade our son from leaving the room. In the evening, he would completely undress and call the children under the blanket, demanding that the girls also be undressed, turning on cartoons and spending time with them that way. Before bed, he insisted that everyone be without clothes and, under the pretext of giving massages, rubbed them with oil, massaging their entire bodies for hours,” Lina Kemler reported, referring to the case materials.
According to her, despite her outrage and attempts to create scandals, all accusations ultimately fell on her.
“He accused me of being sexually obsessed and threatened that if he complained, I would lose custody of our youngest son. For years, we were made to believe that his behavior was normal. He used physical and psychological pressure, instilling in the children that I was 'obsessed.' I talked about divorce and suggested other options, but each time it ended with physical violence,” Lina added.
Although only one older daughter is involved in the criminal case (who was 14 at the time of the crimes), the woman claims that S.S. harassed all three daughters.
“A separate case was opened for the two younger girls, but it was quickly closed. He beat our sons and me, but there was not enough evidence for the criminal case, as we did not document the beatings. Once, when he beat me severely, our older son called the police. We told the law enforcement officers everything, and he was detained, first placed in a temporary detention facility, and then in a pre-trial detention center,” she recounted.
Initially, a civil case was opened, for which her husband served seven days, and then a criminal case was initiated.
“The first instance courts lasted about six months, and in the end, he was sentenced to seven years under articles 158 (lewd acts) and 34 (continuing crime). During this time, the defendant changed three lawyers, while we were defended by a public defender. They appealed to the regional court, and there were more than 12 hearings, during one of which the entire panel of judges changed. Ultimately, the regional court upheld the sentence. S.S. was sent to colony No. 10 in Jalal-Abad, where he spent only a few months before his lawyer filed a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court requesting to overturn the sentence,” Lina continued.
“We did not file a complaint against the cassation because we did not know it was necessary. Our lawyer reassured us, claiming that we had won and that there were no procedural errors in the case. However, after his reassurances, we relaxed. We were told that we would be summoned to the Supreme Court, and we waited. But in early February 2026, the lawyer informed us that our case was back in Tokmak. It turned out that the hearing in the Supreme Court took place without our participation, which violates our rights. We were not even notified of the hearing date. My daughter and I always attended all the court sessions, and this time we could not even express our opinions,” she noted.
The court ruling mentions procedural errors and unlawful interrogations of the children.
“I understand that the Supreme Court's decision cannot be appealed. But how do I explain to the children that they will have to undergo examinations and give testimonies again, possibly meeting with their father? During the first interrogation, there was video surveillance, and over the course of two years of court proceedings with five children, we will have to go through this again. I really want the children's rights to no longer be violated. The defendant has money and lawyers, while we have nothing, and we are simply losing; it’s terrible,” Lina Kemler added.
Currently, the process in Tokmak has resumed, and S.S. has had his preventive measure extended.
“Interestingly, in the appeal, his lawyer claims that S.S. has four children to support, who need his help, and that they allegedly have been left without means of subsistence. This concerns our children, against whom he committed crimes. How is this possible? He needs to be kept away from the children. They are completely dependent on me, well-fed and clothed, and everything is fine with them,” Lina noted.
She plans to contest the appeal and has already prepared a response for the regional court. The woman hopes for a fair decision and protection of her children's rights.
Ahead of her is a court case to deprive her ex-husband of parental rights, and she worries that if he is acquitted, he will not be deprived of these rights. This would allow him to continue interacting with the children and exerting pressure on them.
Lina has sought support from representatives of the ombudsman institution, and according to her, the ombudsman promised to attend the court hearings.
