The primary purpose of this site is to provide evidence against the victims an official who commits a crime (part 1 of article. 15 of the Code) and the involvement of the perpetrator by law enforcement agencies and the courts to statutory liability.
Help.
4 November 2008. 45 km from Maikop at 14:45 mosk. BP. A traffic accident occurred involving Agirova AH, who was behind the wheel "Toyta, Camry, and Bersirova AA while driving" VAZ-2107 ". As a result of road accidents killed four people, one family Bersirovyh:
Bersirova Asiet Yunusovna born in 1959.
Bersirov Ashad Aslanovich 12.05.1981 was born.
Bersirova Ruzan Yusufovna 13.11.1983 was born.
Bersirov Aytech Adamovich was born 03/28/2007.
For two and a half days at the site was put up a cordon, banned travel and approach to the accident site. In place of the accident had left 22 officers of various departments of the Interior Ministry and prosecutors, including the interior minister and his deputies. With that said the unprecedented measures taken to conceal the true culprit of the accident.
1. Agyria AH was intoxicated, refused to blood donation as an entry in the first report about the accident. At the hospital, he also refused donations from the alcohol, evidenced by a report of the investigator JI Shovgenovskomu area in which he, according to the doctor on duty at the Adygei Republican Clinical Hospital Romanenko VV, reported that refuses Aghir A.H donate blood for testing for alcohol content. Refusal in the report also confirmed the doctor on duty the intensive care unit ARKB, Dzharimov NN and nurse receptionist Bedanokova MG by inadvertence that the words of Chief of Investigation Department of the Interior Ministry of Adygea Alexander Daineko not put the blood in time, and then he entered the chemical. drugs. Although the level of modern medicine allows (if desired) and a few days to determine the composition of the blood of different components, it was done intentionally.
2.So words chief SU MOI RA Daineko A.: "The accident occurred during daylight hours. Visibility is beautiful.Precipitation was no coating is dry. We drove to the meeting each other two cars. But they faced directly in the center, on the dividing strip or a single centimeter of braking distance. Cars moving towards each other at high speeds "Toyota Camry" 130-150 km / h, VAZ 90-100 km / h (examination of the speed is not identified). After the strike, razminuvshis, cars remained in their lanes. In this and the complexity of the investigation, some millimeters can decide who is to blame. "
We believe that the place of accident was blocked for two days in order to hide the evidence and distort the truth, the factual circumstances of the accident.
As a result of the collision (as we believe on our side of the road), a child decapitated, which was found at 20-25 meters from the car along the route. Throop Bersirovoy AY, flying out of the car was two feet from the car VAZ 2107 parallel route. Location of the corpses were recorded deliberately to distort the original scheme of road accident in which experts and rely result in an investigation (by the way, the case has been running seventh investigator prior were also excluded for various reasons).
Chronology of decisions by case number 7080080.
05/11/2008, the senior investigator of CO at ATS Shovgenovskomu area Hazeshuk RA, a criminal case on the grounds of a crime under the Criminal Code ch.Z st.264 in fact loaded on the road accident that occurred on 04.11.2008, at about 15 - 00 on the highway Maikop-Psebai between p.Zarevo and h.Kelemetov Shovgenovskogo district, involving a driver Agirova AK, driving a car, "Toyota Camry and the driver Bersirova AA, driving a car VAZ 2107. As a result of collision, the driver of VAZ 2107 Bersirov AA, and passengers Bersirova AJ, Bersirova RY, and AA bersirov died from his injuries at the accident site, and the driver of the car, "Toyota Camry" Aghir AH. and passenger sister Agirova AK, Kardanova MH, received minor injuries.
11/6/2008 by the decree of the head of the investigative body, head to the MIA SU RA Daineko VA, a criminal case removed (in connection with the alleged great social and political rezonansom.Na moment Aghir AH, was the secretary of the Political Council of United Russia the Republic of Adygea.) from the production of an investigator SB ATS Shovgenovskogo area and sent for further investigation, the investigator MF SU at MOI RA Adaktilidi YD
In accordance with the conclusion of transport trassologicheskoy expertise from 23.12.2008 years spent PG Krasnodar FEL, to determine the coordinates of the collision of vehicles, as well as their location relative to the boundaries of the carriageway at the time of the collision, it is not possible.
At the conclusion of a comprehensive forensic forensics from 17.03.2009 years, undertaken by experts in Rostov-on-Don, FEL, clashes occurred in the lane the car, "Toyota Camry".
05/05/2009, the Acting Investigator MF SU at MOI RA Kryukov, AS, a criminal investigation into the accident terminated pursuant to paragraph 4 of Part 1 of Art. 24 of the Code, in connection with the death of a suspect Bersirova AA
We have complained to the Prosecutor Okhlopkova SA
28.05.2009 by the Deputy Prosecutor Gubin SA, the decision about the direction of the material inspection head the investigative body to address the issue of cancellation of the termination of criminal proceedings on 05.05.2009 year.
04/06/2009, the head of the MF SD at MIA by RA Tsikushevym EB ordered the cancellation of the termination of criminal proceedings on 05.05.2009, and the resumption of criminal proceedings.
23.06.2009 years in the criminal case reappointed forensic examination.
Agyria A.H filed a complaint in the order of Art. 125 of the Code, assuming that the prosecutor and the chief investigative unit, respectively, from 28.05.09g. 4/6/2009 and was not based on the requirements of the law.
Resolution Shovgenovskogo District Court on July 8, 2009 granted the petitioner's complaint Agirova AK, deemed illegal and unreasonable, with duties assigned to eliminate the violations, the decision of Deputy Prosecutor of 28.05.2009g. about the direction of the audit materials to address the issue of cancellation of the investigator to dismiss the criminal case and the ruling of the Chief SCH SOU at MOI RA 04.06.2009g., cancellation of the order for termination of criminal proceedings and the resumption of criminal proceedings.
Cassation ruling of the judicial collegium on criminal cases the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea on 11.08.2009 year, the judge's ruling Shovgenovskogo District Court on 08.07.2009 year, on the complaint Agirova AK, upheld, and the prosecutor cassation Shovgenovskogo district and appeal stakeholders without satisfaction.
20/8/2009 by the decree of the Head of the investigative body acting Head of the MIA SOU Kadakoevym NA, abolished the illegal and unwarranted decision of the chief MF SU at the Interior Ministry on RA to cancel the order for termination of the criminal case on 05.05.2009, and the resumption of criminal proceedings on 04.06.2009 year.
20.08.2009 by the decision of the chief effect of the SU at the MOI of RA Tsikushevym EB reversed an order terminating the criminal case of 05.05.02009g. and reopened the criminal proceedings in connection with what prosecutors 20/08/2009, from the Republic of Adygea has received petitions from citizens Tlevtsezheva NA and Mekesheva RM, according to which Tlevtsezhev NK seen at the scene 04/11/2008, unidentified person prior to the inspection scene moved debris from the car and the battery in the direction of the car brand Toyota Camry to be checked by carrying out the investigative and operative - search activities.
24.08.2009 by the decision of the investigator MF SU at MOI RA Tuguzom KA in this criminal case reappointed forensic forensics.
27.08.2009 by the decision of the Deputy Procurator of the Republic of Adygea Gubin SA in the order of Art.124 of the Code rejected the complaint Agirova AH the actions of the chief MF SU at MOI RA Tsikusheva EB
28.8.2009 AH year Aghir filed a complaint in the order of Art. 125 of the Code, recognizing illegal and unjustified decision of the chief effect of the SU at the MOI of RA Tsikusheva EB to cancel the order for termination of criminal proceedings on 05.05.2009, and the resumption of criminal proceedings from 20.08.09g. and the investigator's resolution midrange for SU MOI RA Tuguz KA from 24.08.09g. re-appointing forensic forensics.
Decree Shovgenovskogo District Court on September 2, 2009 granted the petitioner's complaint Agirova AK, legitimizing and unfounded decision of the chief effect of the SU at the MOI of RA Tsikusheva EB to cancel the order for termination of criminal proceedings on 05.05.2009, and the resumption of criminal proceedings from 20.08.09g. and the investigator's decision MF SU at MOI RA Tuguz KA from 24.08.09g. re-appointing forensic forensics.
14.10.2009, the decision to initiate review proceedings. Judge RA Armed Panesh H.E. by examining a supervisory complaint Bersirova AS, AA Bersirova and supervisory review of the deputy prosecutor of the Republic of Adygea Gubin SA decided to initiate review proceedings under the supervisory complaint by the victim Bersirova INC. and Bersirova AA and supervisory review of the deputy prosecutor of the Republic of Adygea Gubin SA for review of Judge Shovgenovskogo District Court of Cassation, 07/08/2009, and the definition of the Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea on August 11, 2009.
11.11.2009 by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea supervisory review of the deputy prosecutor of the Republic of Adygea and supervisory victim's complaint Bersirova INC. and Bersirova AAdismissed.
11/3/2009 years Shovgenovsky district court examined in open court complaint Agirova AK, a ruling chief MF SU at MOI RA Tsikusheva EB, on 20/08/2009, on cancellation of the termination of the criminal case and to resume production criminal proceedings, as well as the investigator's decision MF SU at MOI RA Tuguz KA, on 08/24/2009, on the re-appointment of forensic forensics.
02.11.2009 at Shovgenovsky district court received a statement from Agirova AK, which asks the court not to consider his complaint and add to it a ruling chief MF SU at the Interior Ministry in the Republic of Armenia on 20.08.2009 on the lifting of the order for termination of criminal proceedings as well as the investigator's decision MF SU at MOI RA Tuguz KA, on 24/08/2009, on the re-appointment of forensic forensics. Production of the complaint requests to stop.
Decision: Application Agirova AK, suit, complaint Agirova AK, leave without review and dismiss the complaint.
Thus, the courts of three instances of the Republic of Adygea: Shovgenovsky District Court, the Judicial Panel for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea decision of the Deputy Prosecutor of the Republic of Adygea on 28.05.2009 on the direction of the audit materials manager investigative body to address the question of abolishing unlawful orders from 05.05.2009 year declared illegal. Illicit also recognized and the ruling chief MF SU at MOI RA Tsikusheva EB, on cancellation of the termination of the criminal case number 7080080 and the resumption of criminal proceedings.
Cassation ruling of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea on 11.08.2009 year, the above regulations remain unchanged, and the prosecutor cassation Shovgenovskogo area, without satisfaction.
Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Adygea on 11.11.2009 year, supervising a victim's complaint Bersirova AS, Bersirova AA, and supervisory review of the Deputy Prosecutor of the Republic of Gubin SA, dismissed.
Believe, held court rulings are illegal and not justified and must be rescinded for the following reasons: For example, during consideration of the complaint Agirova AH, the court found that a criminal investigation into the accident, which occurred 4/11/2008 d on highway Maikop-Psebai, in the district's. Kelemetov Shovgenovskogo area involving cars "Toyota Camry" running Agirova AH, and VAZ 2107 running Bersirova AA, which killed four people (three passengers and the driver himself), was instituted 05.11.2008 r Part 3 of Art. 264 of the Criminal Code (as amended. FZ № 162 from 08.12.2003 onwards). Interrogator SB ATS on Shovgenovskomu area Hazeshuk RA
The investigation was assigned and carried out transport trassologicheskaya examination № 2799/5-1/13.2, 13.3 on 23.12.2008 which resulted in clashes vehicles set was not possible.
Then, during the preliminary investigation was carried out one more complex forensic № 347/07-01, 348/07-1 from 17.03.2009, according to the conclusions which the collision occurred on the roadway intended for traffic car "Toyota Camry" .
Based on the findings of the last examination, the decision of the investigator MF SU at MOI RA Kryukov A. from 05.05.2009, the criminal case was dismissed on the grounds p.4 p.1 st24 PGA Russia, in connection with the death of a suspect Bersirova AA
28.05.2009, the Deputy Prosecutor of the Republic of Adygea, after studying the case materials, the decision about the direction of the case file at the Interior Ministry chief Su of the Republic of Adygea to address the issue of cancellation of the termination of the criminal case № 7080080.
04/06/2009 MF SC, the head of the MIA of the Republic of Armenia Tsikushev EB, agreeing with the opinion of the Deputy Procurator of the Republic, ordered the cancellation of the termination of criminal proceedings and the resumption of the proceedings.
Basis for making these decisions was the presence contradicts the conclusions of these examinations, which did not allow an unambiguous conclusion on what lane collided vehicles, and who was responsible for the accident.
Conclusions courts on the illegality and invalidity ruling deputy chief prosecutor of the republic MF SU at the Interior Ministry of the Republic of Adygea, based on the fact that these regulations allegedly did not contain a full and sufficient motivation to cancel orders from 05.05.2009g. to dismiss the criminal case. In this case, the court did not specify out why the above regulations are illegal and unfounded, it does not specify what the constitutional rights and freedoms have been violated, as was the limited access to justice, which were contradictions between the evidence and to make conclusions. On the contrary, actually preventing the production of re-examination, the court violated the right of victims Bersirovyh under Art. 52 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on access to justice.
Consequently, the court in violation of Part 4 of Art. 7 of the Code itself is not made a reasoned and unreasonable decision.
In addition, the court on appeal Agirova AH violated other rules of procedural law.
Thus, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 decision the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation № 1 of 10.02.2009g. "On the practice of examination by courts of appeals in the order of Art. 125 of the Code, "the judges should, based on available data and further submissions to verify the legality of decisions and actions (or inaction) of officials referred to in Part 1, Art. 125 of the Code relating to the claim of the citizens to eliminate violations that infringe upon their rights and freedoms.
Under the provisions of paragraph 12 Ruling of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation № 1 of 10.02.2009g. "On the practice of examination by courts of appeals in the order of Art. 125 of the Code, "persons involved in the hearing is entitled not only to learn the material, but also provide the court additional materials relevant to the complaint. Copies of the submissions are stored in the proceedings on the complaint.
In its ruling, the court did not fully brought the position of the prosecutor, who participated in the hearing. In particular, the decision does not reflect and actually does not take into account the position of the prosecutor due to the fact that when making decisions Deputy Public Prosecutor and Chief of the MF SD at MIA for the Republic of Adygea, had not only the foundation, associated with the presence of mutually exclusive findings of examinations, but also pointed to the confirmed the presence of doubt in the validity of the conclusion of a comprehensive forensic forensic № 347 / 07/01, 348/07-1 from 17.03.2009g.
In this case, the prosecutor, to support his arguments, it was stated the petition and the materials of the criminal case № 7080080 on the results of the Federal Security Service of the Republic of Adygea on Agirova AHоперативно-розыскных мероприятий. Эти материалы свидетельствовали о том, что Агиров А.Х. предпринял активные действия по оказанию воздействия, проводивших экспертизу № 347/07-01 , 348/07-1 от 17.03.2009г., фактически исключающую его виновность в ДТП. Представленные следователю и в суды материалы о результатах оперативно-розыскной деятельности в установленном законом порядке были рассекречены, соответствовали требованиям УПК РФ и имели доказательственное значение. Кроме того, данные факты прямо свидетельствуют о наличии сомнений в обоснованности положенного в основу постановления о прекращении уголовного дела №7080080 , заключение комплексной криминалистической судебной экспертизы № 347/07-01,348/07-1 от 17.03.2009г.
В соответствии с требованиями ч. 2 ст. 207 УПК РФ, отмеченные обстоятельства являются безусловным основанием для проведения повторной экспертизы у других экспертов, т. е. являются основанием для отмены постановления о прекращении уголовного дела и проведении дополнительного расследования.
Однако, суд отказал в удовлетворении ходатайства прокурору о приобщении указанных материалов и не принял их во внимание. При этом указанные решения ничем не аргументировал и не обосновал.
Таким образом, суд нарушил право прокурора на предоставление дополнительных материалов, имеющих отношение к жалобе.
Фактически препятствуя в производстве повторной экспертизы, суд, вышел за рамки предоставленных полномочий и вмешался в ход расследования уголовного дела, что противоречит п. 2 и 3 ст. 15 УПК РФ. В соответствии с указанными пунктами функции обвинения, защиты и разрешения дела отделены друг от друга и не могут быть возложенными на один и тот же орган. Суд не является органом уголовного преследования и не выступает на стороне обвинения или защиты.
Постановлением Президиума Верховного Суда РА от 11.11.2009г., надзорная жалоба потерпевших Берсировых и надзорное представление заместителя прокурора РА также оставлено без удовлетворения. Надзорная инстанция Президиума ВС РА извратила мотивы, по которым прокурор рекомендовал руководству СЧ СУ при МВД по РА решить вопрос об отмене постановления следователя СЧ СУ при МВД по РА о прекращении уголовного дела № 7080080.
Прокурор Республики Адыгея, потерпевшие и адвокат указывают в своих жалобах, что постановлением прокурора, адресованного руководству СЧ СУ при МВД по РА, - никаких нарушений Конституционных прав Агирова А.Х. указанным постановлением и постановлением начальника СЧ СУ об отмене постановления следователя о прекращении уголовного дела № 7080080 и возобновлении производства по данному уголовному делу допущено не было.
Ни суд первой инстанции - Шовгеновский районный суд РА, ни кассационная инстанция Верховного Суда РА, ни надзорная инстанция Верховного Суда РА так и не смогли указать, какие же все-таки Конституционные права Агирова А.Х. могли быть нарушены указанными постановлениями прокурора и начальника Следственной Части, не смотря на то, что п. 1, ст. 125 УПК РФ прямо указывает : «Постановление дознавателя и следователя об отказе в возбуждении уголовного дела, о прекращении уголовного дела, а равно иные решения и действия дознавателя, следователя и прокурора, которые способны причинить ущерб конституционным правам и свободам участников уголовного судопроизводства либо затруднить доступ граждан к правосудию, могут быть обжалованы в районный суд по месту производства предварительного расследования».
Таким образом, Агиров А.Х. мог подать жалобу в порядке ст. 125 УПК РФ, но поскольку его конституционные права и свободы не нарушены и не могли быть нарушены, то в его жалобе должно было быть отказано судом первой инстанции.
Президиум Верховного Суда РА указывает, что обжалуемые судебные решения соответствуют требованиям ч. 4 ст. 7 УПК РФ. К сожалению это не так. Аргументов у суда первой и кассационной инстанции, по поводу каких именно прав Агирова А.Х. произошли нарушения, так и не нашлось вовсе. А ссылка суда первой инстанции на ст. 413 УПК РФ, как было указанно в выступлении адвоката потерпевших, полностью дисквалифицирует судей первой и кассационной инстанций.
Оставляя надзорную жалобу потерпевших и надзорное представление прокурора без удовлетворения, а судебное решение без изменения суд поступил не по закону, а по принципу «и волки сыты и овцы целы», но при этом он не увидел, какие процессуальные последствия могут быть в случае предъявления обвинения виновному в ДТП лицу.
В рамках гражданского судопроизводства на основании материалов дела было проведено экспертное исследование, которое проводилось в Бюро Независимых Экспертиз «Версия» находящимся в г. МОСКВА по адресу ул. Матросская Тишина, д. 23, стр. 1, которая дала ответы на поставленные перед ними вопросы, самый важный из которых говорит о том: «По имеющимся данным сделать вывод о том, что данное дорожно-транспортное происшествие произошло из-за несоответствия действий водителя автомобиля ВАЗ 2107 требованиям Правил дорожного движения, с экспертной точки зрения, НЕЛЬЗЯ».
Прокуратура и потерпевшие отправили определение и жалобу в коллегию Верховного Суда Российской Федерации по уголовным делам.
Уголовное и гражданское судопроизводство приостановлено в связи с тем, что проведение повторной криминалистической экспертизы, которая должна проводиться в ЭКЦ МВД РФ г. Москва. St. Зои и Алексея Космодемьянских 5, Руководитель генерал Мартынов, зам, Китайгородский Евгений Александровичу связи с очерёдностью отложено на июнь-июль 2010 года.
http://www.bersirov.ru/
