Skip to main content

‘Only fools are not afraid’: Ukrainians adapt to life under constant Russian drone attacks

(CNN) — Nikopol, in southern Ukraine, rarely makes the headlines – overshadowed by the threats to the occupied Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant directly across the river. But this city on the front line of Russia’s full-scale invasion has been attacked almost every day since the war began, local authorities say.

Its proximity to Russian military positions only two miles away on the other bank of the Dnipro River means that civilians face a heightened risk of attacks by short-range Russian drones.

“We’ve actually grown somewhat accustomed to the danger, though the feeling of fear never really goes away,” said Oleksandr Varytsev, a poet who also runs a local charity that provides hot meals for elderly and disabled people. “It’s very scary – and if it’s scary for me, you can imagine how older men and women feel when they come to our volunteer center.”

Horrifying video posted by authorities in June showed a small Russian drone target an elderly woman in a wheelchair – an attack that killed three people, including the 87-year-old woman and her son. In April, four more people were killed in a drone attack on a city bus.

Those are just two examples of Russian FPV (first-person view) drones attacking civilians rather than military assets – a phenomenon that’s also playing out in the frontline cities of Kherson and Kramatorsk. Russia has repeatedly claimed it is targeting Ukrainian Armed Forces threats in Nikopol, despite evidence to the contrary.

In recent months, drone sightings in Nikopol have increased from two or three per day to about three every hour, day and night, Varytsev says.

The continual drone threat has forced civilians here to change their everyday behaviors to avoid becoming victims of what they call Russia’s “human safari.” They try not to stand in outdoor spaces like bus stops; schools and kindergartens have been closed; and civilian services like the Ukrainian national post office and city buses are also routinely suspended.

“People are afraid to walk in the street, but they’re adapting to the new reality,” Varytsev said. “We keep our heads up all the time, we no longer look down at our feet.”

Before the full-scale invasion, Nikopol had around 100,000 people and was mostly known for the strawberries it grows for the Ukrainian market. Today, local officials estimate that half of the population has left.

“The city is emptying before our eyes. The situation is very dangerous, and there are more and more attacks every day,” said Oleksii Kirillov, who has worked in freight transportation in Nikopol for more than two decades. Since the war began, his focus has been more on facilitating evacuations than on his transportation business, he said.

Over the past four years, he has learned to distinguish between combat drones and the slower-moving reconnaissance drones. And although fear has dulled, it has never gone away. “Only fools are not afraid.”

Anti-drone innovations

Nikopol is increasingly being covered with overhead fishing nets that can trap FPV drones – a new Ukrainian reality in almost all frontline cities, from Kherson to Kramatorsk. Locals said they’re working to expand the netting that covers roads to their sidewalks as well, to make it safer to walk around.

The drone threat has also driven other innovations, like notifying civilians of incoming drones via a city-wide warning app. Some companies and emergency workers have also been equipped with drone detector devices called “Chuykas.”

Experts say the relatively simple, handheld detection devices, which beep when a threat is incoming, can be effective for tracking drones that operate on analog radio frequencies, but they are unable to identify drones that fly on pre-set paths, use fiber-optic cables or have digital signals.

“It’s better than nothing, but it’s not a silver bullet,” said Carmine Clemente, a professor in radar systems at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland. “It can give you probably a couple of minutes, at least, to get off the bus and try to get sufficiently far away to hide.”

The devices – made by Ukrainian company BlueBird Tech – are being marketed to the civilian sector even more than the military, according to Kateryna Bondar, a senior fellow at the Washington-based think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

The devices have been adopted throughout frontline areas by bus companies, drivers, emergency volunteers and medics, as well as military personnel, she said.

“Every civilian can become a target because unfortunately Russians use those regions to train drone pilots, or just to create psychological campaigns when they hunt people,” said Bondar, an expert in defense innovations and a former adviser to the government of Ukraine.

Mykola Koshelev, who owns a transportation company in Nikopol, said the detection devices are expensive – they cost around $500 each – and difficult for drivers to operate on their own. So, his company has turned instead to an app, Zello, run by a private company, which notifies locals of Russian drones flying nearby.

“They (the drones) are there every day, especially in the mornings between 7 and 9 a.m. when they fly in swarms,” he said. “If they’re very close, the drivers stop the bus, and passengers get off and move away.” In parts of the city that have no internet connection, bus drivers are now using walkie-talkies to communicate about where drones are flying.

“We have no other way of keeping people safe except by being careful,” said Koshelev, adding that drivers are often fearful of coming to work as public transportation is increasingly targeted. “I’ve been in this business for as long as I can remember, and I could never have imagined this. Passenger numbers have fallen overall, but people trust the drivers more and have become friendlier.”

The local radio station, RadioNikopol, has added a function to its app allowing anyone who spots a drone to quickly report it to the station. The announcer breaks into the music whenever there is information to relay about the location of a drone threat. One song was interrupted three times while CNN was listening.

‘It’s as if they’re hunting us down’

Meanwhile, on train journeys throughout the country, it’s now commonplace for people to be forced to evacuate if drones are detected nearby. Civilians have been taught to fan out in different directions from the halted train, as authorities try to reduce the likelihood of mass-casualty events.

There have been more than 5,000 attacks carried out against Ukrainian Railways since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022, according to Ukrainian authorities.

“The situation on the railways has taken a drastic turn for the worse over the past year,” locomotive driver Igor Zachepilov told CNN. “It’s as if they’re hunting us down. And not just freight trains, but passenger trains too.”

Zachepilov said protocols are constantly adapting, and his work has become more difficult amid repeated power cuts to the overhead line system and frequent evacuations. Often, civilians are forced to flee into open fields – considered safer than staying on the highly targeted trains – sometimes waiting for hours with nowhere to hide.

“There was one occasion when we carried out an evacuation. We were stationary at the station for quite a long time – about two hours,” Zachepilov recounted, saying that part of his job is to try to reassure passengers even as he faces his own fears. “We could hear explosions in the distance. Drones were buzzing overhead, flying above us; they were being shot down. It was a bit scary – you don’t know where to hide.”

As drone warfare becomes the new normal, analysts say all these adaptations and lessons from cities like Nikopol could inform the future of Western defense. Ukraine’s military and civil society have become the experts among Western allies, while Russia and Iran have developed their own capabilities.

Clemente, the radar systems professor, noted that Ukrainian industry has become extremely agile to meet evolving threats. “You might need to have new solutions in about six months from when a new threat arrives,” he said. “And the sooner the better.”

Back in Nikopol, freight business owner Kirillov said his family continues to adapt but remains resilient.

“We used to have a big group of friends. Today, only a few of us are left. My kids don’t play outside for more than two hours a day,” he said.

But he is not planning to go anywhere at this stage. “Maybe we’ll organize a fundraiser and buy a drone detector so we can react quickly to the threat. It’s our home. We won’t leave.”

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Doctor convicted of attempted manslaughter of his wife wants a new trial, saying jurors may have been confused

(CNN) — Along the steep Pali Puka trail last spring, the verdant beauty of Oahu spilled out to the Pacific Ocean from the scenic path where Gerhardt and Arielle Konig stood. On that high ridge, they fought for their lives – emotionally, then physically – each later would testify.A trip intended to celebrate Arielle’s birthday – and maybe salvage their troubled marriage – ended with the couple, who share two young children, on the ground attacking each other. He bashed her in the face with a rock. She bit him and squeezed his testicles.Who started the melee became the question at the heart of an attempted second-degree murder charge filed against Gerhardt Konig.Prosecutors said the defendant wanted to kill his spouse and tried to push her off the cliff. But after an emotional, 10-day trial a year later that saw husband, wife and one of Gerhardt Konig’s children from a prior marriage on the stand, the jury found him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted manslaughter.At Konig’s request, a judge on Friday heard arguments on whether a new jury should hear the case because of what two jurors in news interviews revealed soon after issuing the verdict that could send Konig to prison for up to 20 years, along with concern one juror may have communicated about the case outside the jury room during deliberations.“Jury irregularities call into serious question the integrity of this verdict,” defense attorney Thomas Otake wrote in an appeal filed in May.At Friday’s hearing, Judge Paul Wong said the court would question jurors about any outside communications during deliberations before deciding whether to grant a new trial. The court will revisit the matter on September 11.“The court must ascertain the extent of the influence,” Wong said.Whether defendant intended to kill is at issueFinding insufficient evidence to convict Konig of attempted murder, the jury found him guilty of attempted manslaughter, with his actions – even if extremely dangerous – motivated by “extreme mental or emotional disturbance.”Ruling out an attempted murder charge was a relief to Konig’s legal team and left open the possibility Konig could be sentenced to probation, with no jail time at all.“We are thankful that they did not convict him of attempted murder, which would have been life in prison,” Otake told reporters shortly after the verdict was announced.Still, the defense attorney immediately promised an appeal based on unspecified concerns about the judge’s rulings during the trial. When his motion dropped a month later, however, it wasn’t the judge Otake took issue with:The request for a new trial was based on what jurors said after the verdict.“Somebody was definitely hurt; it was a bodily injury to the head that could result in serious bodily injury,” foreperson Makalapua Atkins told CNN affiliate East Idaho News about jurors’ state of mind in deliberations.“The intent to kill is improbable to us based on the evidence presented,” Atkins said in an interview after the verdict with True Crime AZ, adding, “The only people who know what happened on that cliff are the two that were involved.”But under Hawaii law, Konig’s defense team has argued, even a conviction for attempted manslaughter would require the jury to find the defendant was trying to kill the victim – and the foreperson said they didn’t.“The jury did not unanimously believe that Dr. Konig had an intent to kill his wife,” Atkins confirmed in a sworn statement to the defense attorney accompanying his appeal. Prosecutors also asked Atkins to sit down with them for an interview, but she declined, their response to the request for appeal states. CNN could not reach Atkins for comment.Another juror, identified publicly only as Juror #3, also said he had not been convinced Gerhardt Konig intended to take Arielle’s life that day.“I don’t know if he was trying to kill his wife, personally,” he told Honolulu TV station KHON in an on-camera interview. “I do know that it was the capacity to kill his wife, personally. That how I felt about it.”If jurors didn’t understand what was required for conviction, Konig’s attorneys argued, it opens the door to a new trial.“Conduct that could result in death or has the capacity to kill may be reckless, but it is not necessarily intentional, and Hawaiʻi does not recognize attempted reckless manslaughter,” Konig’s defense attorneys said, with the emphasis, in a court filing.Did the jury understand the law?“The jurors’ public remarks raise a serious concern that the verdict may rest upon findings inconsistent with the convicted offense,” Konig’s defense attorneys said in a motion for a new trial.The judge’s instructions – 33 in all – were a lot to digest. They laid out a menu of five possible charges – from second-degree attempted murder to third-degree assault – explaining the order in which they had to be considered and steps to evaluating each.“If and only if you unanimously find that all the elements of Attempted Murder in the Second Degree have been proven by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt, and you unanimously find that the defendant was not acting in Self-Defense, then you must consider the affirmative defense of Extreme Mental or Emotional Disturbance,” one instruction states.In their response to Konig’s request for a new trial, prosecutors did not try to rebut the claim jurors were confused, instead saying it doesn’t matter. The “internal thought process” of the jury, even when revealed voluntarily by jurors, should not be reconsidered by the court after a verdict, prosecutor Joel Garner stated.“Jurors can change their mind, but what matters is whether the verdict was unanimous at the time it was rendered,” the prosecution wrote. “In this case it was, even according to the on-the-record statements of the foreperson – and therefore a later declaration disagreeing with the verdicts is not a sufficient basis to grant a motion for a new trial.”Juror may have revealed their discussions during deliberationKonig’s defense also raises another concern about the jury: that one member may have been communicating about the case to an outsider while deliberations were still underway.“I’ve been texting with one of the juror’s (sic) and they’re going for count 3 attempted manslaughter,” says a message posted to the live chat of trial coverage by the Law&Crime Network.The comment was first spotted by someone – whose name is redacted in the court filing – and emailed to prosecutors, who alerted the judge.“What caught my attention is that this commenter specifically predicted the verdict – that Konig would be convicted of attempted manslaughter – before it was announced,” the person wrote in the email.Whether it was legitimate or a hoax has not been proven, but Konig’s defense attorneys say the fact that it correctly foreshadowed the verdict should give it credibility.“Although the full scope of any such communication remains unknown, these circumstances raise substantial concerns regarding the jury’s exposure to outside influence or extraneous information during deliberations,” the defense team wrote.Prosecutors say even if the comment was authentic, it doesn’t require a new trial unless there is proof that “external influence” swayed the decision of the juror.“A juror disclosing where the jury stands is certainly problematic, but on its own it does not indicate that the other party influenced that juror in any way,” Garner said in their court filing.Could a new trial backfire?If Konig, who is in jail pending his sentencing, is granted a new trial, it could come with a big risk: He could face the attempted murder charge again after beating it in his first trial.Otake is trying to make sure that doesn’t happen.“The jury did not convict Dr. Konig of attempted murder in the second degree,” the defense lawyer wrote, arguing the conviction on the lesser charge amounts to an attempted murder acquittal since the jury could not convict Konig of both.“Any retrial must therefore be limited to offenses consistent with the jury’s verdict and the constitutional protections against double jeopardy,” Otake added.The Department of the Prosecuting Attorney in Honolulu has not said whether it would try to pursue an attempted murder conviction again if a retrial is ordered.Either way, the legal fight between Gerhardt and Arielle Konig will continue, as their divorce is still pending.“The marriage,” Arielle Konig wrote in her divorce petition, “is irretrievably broken.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story