--- title: "\"You can't blindly believe\": Yekaterina Ostapchuk breaks down Skalnietska's story about her con-artist husband and asks uncomfortable questions" description: "Yekaterina Ostapchuk commented in her stories on Anastasiia Skalnietska's story about her con-artist husband: the blogger stated that she is not blaming her, but is asking questions about the car registration, the prison situation, and the declaration." date: 2026-09-23T11:28:00.000Z lang: en url: https://xab.info/en/posts/ostapchuk-comments-on-skalnietskas-story-about-con-artist-husband tags: [katerina-ostapchuk, anastasia-skalnytska, fact-checking, instagram-stories, celebrity-news] publisher: "XAB.info" --- # "You can't blindly believe": Yekaterina Ostapchuk breaks down Skalnietska's story about her con-artist husband and asks uncomfortable questions ![Ekaterina Ostapchuk skeptically analyzes Skalnitska's story about her con-artist husband, asking tough questions](https://xab.info/media/2026/09/23/ostapchuk-prokomentirovala-istoriyu-skalnytskoy-o-muzhe-af-riste/ostapchuk-prokomentirovala-istoriyu-skalnytskoy-o-muzhe-af-riste-1.webp) ## 🎯 Key Points - Ostapchuk does not rule out deception on the part of Skalnietska's ex-husband, but doubts that she knew nothing about his activities. - The blogger asks questions about the registration of the cars, the prison situation, and the contents of the declaration. - Ostapchuk emphasizes that her post is not an accusation but a call for fact-checking and a critical attitude toward public statements. Anastasiia Skalnietska's public story about how her ex-husband allegedly deceived her by engaging in illegal activities sparked widespread resonance on social media. Yekaterina Ostapchuk joined the discussion, commenting on Skalnietska's statement in her Instagram stories (as reported by Styler, with a link to them). At the same time, she immediately set the frame: she does not call on her audience to trust her personally and does not accuse her former colleague, but instead urges a critical attitude toward public statements and asks questions where, in her view, explanations are lacking. ### Context: why Skalnietska's story went viral In her accounts, Skalnietska claimed that she had become a victim of her ex-husband, who, according to her, had hidden from her the nature of his activities and the "astronomical" debts associated with them. She also mentioned a situation in which, as she described it, her husband ended up in prison, and she "found the money" for him to be released. It is precisely these fragments, in Ostapchuk's assessment, contain inconsistencies that require verification rather than blind acceptance. ### Ostapchuk's position: fact-checking, not accusation Ostapchuk began with a general thought about the need to verify information from public figures: "So as not to become a victim of your husband (or anyone), or a victim of a public figure who has made a statement, you need to do fact-checking. You can't blindly believe what you are told." She emphasized that she does not rule out the possibility of deception on the man's part, but doubts that Skalnietska really "knew nothing" about his activities. "I am not blaming Nastia for anything. I am asking a question. It is normal to ask questions when you doubt the truthfulness of what someone is trying to prove to you," the blogger explained. ### Key questions: the car, the prison, and the declaration Ostapchuk separately examined several details. Regarding the cars, she asked how they were purchased and in whose name they were registered: if in Skalnietska's name, then she must have been present during the paperwork, and if by power of attorney, then a notary can confirm this. On the prison situation, she asked what exactly was meant by "found the money for him to be released," to whom the funds were handed over, and whether this constitutes a public admission of bribing law enforcement officials. She separately drew attention to the declaration, in which, according to her, the husband is listed as a junior inspector of the police department for physical security in Kyiv, while Skalnietska is listed as the holder of corporate rights and the ultimate beneficiary of legal entities, with no real estate or cars appearing in the declaration. Ostapchuk also asked why the debts are mentioned only in general terms without specific amounts. ### Contradictory data Here the versions of the two sides diverge. Skalnietska claims that she knew nothing about her ex-husband's activities and became his victim, and also calls expensive gifts "counterfeits." Ostapchuk, on the contrary, allows that there was deception on the man's part, but questions the thesis of Skalnietska's complete unawareness, citing the declaration and the logic of property registration. At the same time, Ostapchuk openly admits that she herself may be wrong: "I believe that she too became his victim. I hope I am wrong, and Nastia either simply doesn't know how to tell the story or will yet show all the evidence." Thus, in Ostapchuk's assessment, neither side has provided conclusive evidence, and her breakdown remains a series of questions rather than established facts. ### Conclusion Ostapchuk's comment is neither a confirmation nor a refutation of Skalnietska's story: it is a public call for fact-checking and a set of questions to which, in her words, there are still no answers. Until documents, testimonies, or official explanations appear, both versions β€” of complete unawareness and of complicity β€” remain unverified. The audience is left to wait and see whether Skalnietska will provide the evidence that Ostapchuk refers to. ## πŸ” Fact-Check Verification - [Yekaterina Ostapchuk casts doubt on Nastia Skalnietska's words about her con-artist husband (photo)](https://styler.rbc.ua/ukr/people/katerina-ostapchuk-prokomentuvala-rozpovid-1790160119.html) - ΠŸΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Ρ„Π°ΠΊΡ‚ коммСнтария ΠžΡΡ‚Π°ΠΏΡ‡ΡƒΠΊ Π² сториз ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡ‚ Ρ†ΠΈΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ ΠΏΠΎ Π°Π²Ρ‚ΠΎ, Ρ‚ΡŽΡ€ΡŒΠΌΠ΅, Π΄Π΅ΠΊΠ»Π°Ρ€Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π³Π°ΠΌ. - [Yekaterina Ostapchuk responds to accusations that she "stole" the husband from the family](https://www.unian.net/lite/stars/volodimir-ostapchuk-druzhina-veduchogo-ziznalasya-chi-diysno-bula-yogo-kohankoyu-13186671.html) - Другая Ρ‚Π΅ΠΌΠ° (Π’Π»Π°Π΄ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡ€ ΠžΡΡ‚Π°ΠΏΡ‡ΡƒΠΊ), Π½Π΅ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Ρ„Π°ΠΊΡ‚Ρ‹ ΠΏΠΎ истории Π‘ΠΊΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ†ΠΊΠΎΠΉ. - [Yekaterina Ostapchuk reveals how she won Vladimir's heart after his divorce](https://www.unian.net/lite/stars/volodimir-ostapchuk-druzhina-veduchogo-rozpovila-yak-voni-poznayomilisya-13181556.html) - Другая Ρ‚Π΅ΠΌΠ° (Π’Π»Π°Π΄ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡ€ ΠžΡΡ‚Π°ΠΏΡ‡ΡƒΠΊ), Π½Π΅ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Ρ„Π°ΠΊΡ‚Ρ‹ ΠΏΠΎ истории Π‘ΠΊΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΈΡ†ΠΊΠΎΠΉ. ## ❓ FAQ ### Q: Does Ostapchuk accuse Skalnietska of lying? **A:** No. Ostapchuk explicitly says that she is not blaming Skalnietska and allows that she became a victim of deception, but she asks questions about the details of her story. ### Q: What exactly are the questions Ostapchuk asks? **A:** She asks in whose name the cars were registered and how, what was meant by "found the money for the husband to be released from prison," and also refers to the declaration in which Skalnietska is listed as the beneficiary of legal entities, but with no real estate or cars. ### Q: Is this a confirmation of deception? **A:** No. This is a public breakdown of one side without independent evidence; both versions remain unverified until documents appear.