nd reappeared on the porch holding a machine-gun. At that moment he was shot with a silencer-equipped gun. After he had fallen to the ground, the men, who, in Mrs Dangayeva's opinion were military servicemen, started running away from the yard. Her nephew picked up her husband's gun and opened fire at them.
The investigators collected from the crime scene: 49 bullet casings of calibre 7.62 x 38 mm, 41 of which had been fired from the calibre 7.62 AKM machine-gun assigned to S. Kh. Dangayev as his service gun under licence No. 519506-75 and 8 bullet casings which had been shot from another gun. Additionally, the investigation also collected 8 calibre 7.62 x 38 mm bullet casings which had been fired from a sniper rifle or calibre 7.62 machine-gun and 3 calibre 7.62 x 33 mm bullets..."
On the same date the Chechnya prosecutor's office informed the first applicant of the decision to reopen the investigation and undertook to update her on any progress in the proceedings.
30. On an unspecified date in 2003 the investigators ordered a ballistic report on the bullet casings which had been found at the scene on 23 October 2002.
31. On 19 May 2003 the investigation was transferred to the prosecutor's office of the Staropromyslovskiy district of Grozny ("the district prosecutor's office").
32. On 18 June 2003 the district prosecutor's office informed the first applicant that the investigation had been suspended owing to the failure to establish the identity of the killers and that she had the right to challenge the decision before a higher prosecutor or a court.
33. On 19 June 2003 the district prosecutor's office suspended the investigation owing to the failure to establish the killers' identity. The applicants were not informed.
34. On 28 July 2003 a lawyer acting on behalf of the first applicant requested the district prosecutor's office to provide the first applicant with a copy of their decision of 19 June 2003.
35. On 24 October 2003 the SRJI requested the Chechnya prosecutor's office to provide detailed information on the investigation, in particular, on whether the findings of the ballistic report had been used to identify the type of gun used and the killers and whether the bullets had been extracted from the body, placed with the investigation file and submitted to the ballistic experts for evaluation. The prosecutor's office was also asked to inform the applicant why the investigators had also decided to examine the investigation files in criminal cases Nos. 54824 and 54098 and of the results of the comparative ballistic expert evaluation of the bullet casings in all three cases. Finally, the prosecutor's office was asked to provide the first applicant and her representative with a copy of the ballistic report and of the decision granting the first applicant victim status and to inform her about progress in the investigation.
36. On 21 December 2003 the SRJI again wrote to the Chechnya prosecutor's office stating that they had not received any response to their request of 24 October 2003.
37. On 6 February 2004 the district prosecutor's office quashed the decision to suspend the investigation and reopened the criminal proceedings. The decision stated, inter alia:
"...[the investigators] failed to question witnesses Mrs L.B., Mr R.G., who was born in 1964, Mr I.Sh. and Mr S.V...
It is necessary [for the investigators] to identify and question the persons who saw the car and armoured vehicles used by the unidentified persons who arrived at Saidkhasan Dangayev's house, to establish their route to the house and the direction in which they departed.
It is necessary [for the investigators] to enquire of the Headquarters of the Internal Troops of the Russian Ministry of the Interior, the Armed Forces and other law-enforcement agenci
> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 16 17 18