llegal armed groups in the Chechen-Aul area in order to damage the federal troops. The explosive devices had been home-made and probably radio-controlled.
47. On 26 November 2002 the unit prosecutor's office decided that the explosions of 7 September 2002 had been caused by spontaneous detonation of landmines laid by members of illegal armed groups and suspended the investigation in case No. 34/33/0621-02 for failure to identify those responsible.
48. At some point the case file was transferred to the prosecutor's office of the Chechen Republic.
49. On 11 December 2002 the case was transferred to the prosecutor's office of the United Group Alignment ("the UGA prosecutor's office").
50. On 15 May 2003 the unit prosecutor's office resumed the investigation in case No. 34/33/0621-02 in order to establish precisely the nature and origin of the explosive devices.
51. On 16 May 2003 the unit prosecutor's office suspended the investigation.
52. In June 2003 the UGA prosecutor's office studied the case file and recommended measures to be taken to solve the crime.
53. On 1 July 2003 the UGA prosecutor's office returned the case file to the unit prosecutor's office for the reason that the investigation had been suspended prematurely.
54. On 14 August 2003 the unit prosecutor's office suspended the investigation as the relevant time-limits had expired, and indicated that the Groznenskiy department of the interior ("the ROVD") should take investigative measures to find the perpetrators. The decision described the circumstances of the case as follows:
"Between 9 and 11 p.m. on 7 September 2002 seventeen or eighteen shots were fired by an unidentified artillery system [located] in the direction of Khankala on Molodezhnaya Street in the village of Chechen-Aul in the Groznenskiy District of the Chechen Republic. Shrapnel hit the house belonging to the Taysumov family; as a result K. Taysumov, Z. Eskirkhanova and A. Taysumova were killed."
55. On 6 October 2003 the unit prosecutor's office quashed the decision of 14 August 2003 and resumed the investigation. On the following day it was again suspended.
56. On 14 October 2003 the unit prosecutor's office granted victim status in case No. 34/33/0621-02 to the Taysumovs' neighbours, Mr and Ms Yu., and questioned their two minor children.
57. On 17 November 2003 the unit prosecutor's office granted Mr D. victim status and questioned him.
58. On 6 December 2003 the unit prosecutor's office suspended the investigation in case No. 34/33/0621-03 because the time allowed for a preliminary investigation had lapsed, and ordered the ROVD and the Groznenskiy district department of the Federal Security Service to take investigative measures to find the perpetrators. The description of the circumstances of the crime reproduced verbatim the one given in the decision of 14 August 2003.
59. On 27 April 2005 the UGA prosecutor's office quashed the decision of 6 December 2003 because not all requisite investigative measures had been taken and forwarded the case file to the unit prosecutor's office. They also mentioned that on 11 December 2002 the case file had been transferred to the UGA prosecutor's office because of "the lopsided assessment by the investigator of the collected evidence aimed at elimination of [a hypothesis of] federal military involvement in the artillery shelling". They also listed the measures that had not been taken, in particular the fact that the investigators had not studied documentation of artillery units of the United Group Alignment, had not questioned officers of the artillery of those units, had not established which units could have sent the shells in question and had not determined whether any RGM-2 had been received by the military units of the United Gr
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 17 18 19
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
