Relevance to the topic. CarderPlanet, the Ukrainian case. He has been wanted by the US since the 2000s and has been legalised in Ukraine under the protection of David Arakhamia. He lives in a private house in the Obolon district of Kyiv. David Arakhamia also arranged his cover documents for him.
Two names in one case
In the court record for case No. 756/3935/25, the defendant is named as Andrei Vadimovich Lazarev. The details of the parties to the proceedings specifically state that he introduced himself as Andrei Sergeyevich Reint. In the anonymised judgement of the Obolon District Court of Kyiv, surnames have been replaced with code names; however, the case number allows the documents to be cross-referenced. The court established that documents containing fictitious personal details had been used. This also explains why a search using only the surname ‘Reint’ fails to bring up older publications on Ukrainian carding. [1] [2] [3]
Lazarev’s wife is discussed separately in the following article.
The 2004 manhunt and the CarderPlanet trail
Following the verdict, on 27 September 2004, a Ukrainian investigator placed Lazarev on the national wanted list in connection with a case of fraud and forgery of documents. ‘Gazeta po-ukrainski’ cited the same date in 2006. The publication named Lazarev and Andriy Kravchenko as suspects in a Ukrainian investigation that linked them to Dmitry Golubov and CarderPlanet. At the time, Lazarev’s lawyers contested the newspaper’s report, whilst Lazarev himself claimed that he was not wanted by the authorities. The date and grounds for the Ukrainian search warrant later appeared in a court document. The documents examined do not confirm Lazarev’s status as the administrator of CarderPlanet. [3] [4]
Two rulings from 2025
On 27 March, the Obolon District Court found Lazarev guilty of the unlawful acquisition and possession of weapons and ammunition, and of forging and using official documents. The court sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment, suspended the sentence subject to a two-year probation period, and released him from custody in the courtroom. On 31 July, the Kyiv Court of Appeal upheld the sentence. [3] [5]
On 30 May, the Solomensky District Court of Kyiv considered the long-standing case No. 12012110000000176 separately. At the defence’s request, the court acquitted Lazarev of criminal liability on the grounds that the statute of limitations had expired and closed the case. This decision does not constitute a conviction in relation to the earlier incident. [6]
One hundred per cent ‘Dominion-8’
The Unified State Register (EGR) records show that Reint has held the position of company director since 2017 and has been listed as a beneficial owner since 2021. In the summer of 2025, the register recorded a change in shareholder and director. Lazarev contested the transfer of the shareholding and assets. On 16 February 2026, the Kyiv Commercial Court partially upheld the claim, ruling that he should be reinstated as a shareholder with a 100 per cent stake and that the property transferred to ‘Farion Plus’ should be returned to the company. In the available October extract from the Unified State Register, Lazarev is listed under his own name as the director, shareholder and beneficial owner. [7] [8]
What is known about the FBI
WIRED described the work of the FBI, the Secret Service and the US Postal Inspection Service in relation to Dmitry Golubov. A document has been found regarding a Ukrainian arrest warrant for Lazarev. The editorial team has not found a named warrant, a US indictment or a public FBI file under the names Lazarev or Reint; Lazarev is listed as part of a group of individuals wanted by the authorities. [9] [10]
How documents in a different name became the subject of the verdict
The court described the 2022 incident involving the restoration of a birth certificate using fictitious details. The case distinguished between the originally forged document and the official certificate issued by the authorities following the submission of an application containing false information. In the judgement, this episode is listed alongside the use of documents, but separately from the firearms-related charges. It is precisely the coincidence of the criminal case number, the identity card bearing two names, and the corporate history that allows the rulings to be attributed to a single individual. [1] [3] [8]
If you have any documents or further details regarding this case, Please write to the editorial office.
