lawful and justified.
28. On 22 December 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 April 2006 for the same reasons as before.
29. On 10 April and 5 July 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention for the same reasons as before.
30. On 2 October 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 January 2007, referring to the gravity of the charges and the defendants' "characters". The court also indicated that the purpose of the detention was to eliminate any risk of the defendants' absconding, reoffending or hampering the court proceedings.
31. The applicant appealed, claiming that the Regional Court's conclusions that he might abscond, reoffend or interfere with the proceedings were not supported by relevant facts. He referred to his family situation, permanent place of residence and employment. The Regional Court had already heard all the prosecution witnesses and examined the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, therefore he could no longer put pressure on witnesses or interfere with the proceedings in any other way. He also complained that his detention had exceeded a reasonable length.
32. On 28 December 2006 the Supreme Court upheld the extension order on appeal, finding that it had been lawful, well-reasoned and justified. The defendants were charged with serious criminal offences, and they might therefore abscond, reoffend or obstruct the proceedings. The allegedly excessive length of their detention, their poor health, minor children, elderly parents or permanent place of residence were not sufficient reasons to warrant release.
33. On 27 December 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 April 2007 for the same reasons as before.
34. On 10 April 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 July 2007 for the same reasons as before.
35. On 9 July 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 October 2007, finding that there was no reason to vary the preventive measure.
36. On 11 October 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 January 2008, referring to the gravity of the charges and the risk of absconding or intimidating the witnesses or jurors.
37. On 9 January 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants' detention until 12 April 2008 for the same reasons as before.
38. On 8 April 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court rejected the applicant's request to be released under an undertaking not to leave his place of residence and extended the defendants' detention until 12 July 2008. The decision reads as follows:
"As the trial has not yet been completed, it is necessary to extend the defendants' detention.
The court considers that the gravity of the charges justifies applying to the defendants a preventive measure in the form of detention.
However, in addition to the gravity of the charges - namely the organisation of an armed gang... and commission of assaults on citizens and murders - carrying a sentence of up to twenty years' imprisonment for each of the defendants, the court also takes other factors into account.
Thus, the court is entitled to believe that... application to the defendants of an undertaking not to leave the town or other preventive measures will not exclude the possibility of their absconding or exercising pressure on participants to the proceedings and jurors.
The defendants' argument that their detention has been excessively long is not in itself sufficient to warrant release.
The defendants have not produced any material showing the existence of factors making impossible [sic] their stay in detention facility condition
> 1 2 3 4 ... 16 17 18