The Nikolaev city society of protection of animals is anxious with the facts of crimes over the pets who have become frequent in the Ship district of Nikolaev. Members of society are also revolted that the staff of prosecutor's office closes to it eyes - they simply don't want to see existence of structure of a crime in mockeries at animals. Though statements from citizens of this area in society of protection of animals testify to that, animals treat extremely cruelly, breaking thereby the Law of Ukraine "About protection of animals against ill treatment".
We will remind that moreat the beginning of May in the Ship area the dog - a four-months puppy by nickname Eve (breed fell a victim of the next violence - the Central Asian sheep-dog), the bullet wound in neck area was put to it. According to the conclusion of the veterinarian, based on a x-ray picture, it was wounded by the weapon. Allegedly pneumatic gun. Dog operated, but the bullet didn't manage to be withdrawn as it can cause death of an animal. However even now there is a probability of that at any time a bullet, migrating, can touch vitals and it will lead to a lethal outcome.
Owners of a dog suspect the neighbor with whom they had intense relations of an event. According to Natalya, owners of a dog, from this man repeatedly for many years arrived threats to her grandmother who is the owner of the house. Thus he didn't explain the reason of such behavior.
In the first half of April of this year the neighbor also expressed menacing tone an aversion for a dog by nickname Eve. However owners of an animal, knowing aggressive character of the neighbor, didn't wish to enter the conflict. On - visible, such position angered the man even more, and he decided to pass from words to business.Opposite to a window of a children's bedroom which leaves to its yard, the neighbor pulled a black grid. Incident with a grid preceded that to day when at a dog shot.
After a dog operated, owners of a wounded animal wrote the application in Ship regional department of militia. An attempt to talk to the neighbor was also made. When the speech came about operation cost, from the man the phrase followed:"So how many, you speak, operation cost, what I shot at your dog?... Well, I will think - to give or not". The phrasewas quite eloquent also"Yes nobody was going to shoot at you … the person after all not a dog". The audio recording of this conversation was transferred to law enforcement agencies.
However chief of Ship regional departmentV. CobaI refused initiation of legal proceedings, as"it is impossible to establish existence in its actions(the shooting -edition)hooligan or mercenary motive, circumstance of causing to a dog of damage don't testify to mockery with application of cruel methods". And with the neighbor for the purpose of prevention discussion about inadmissibility of commission of crimes and offenses, maintenance of good-neighbourhood was led.
Having received formal replies from regional prosecutor's office and regional department, owners of a dog addressed in the Nikolaev city society of protection of the rights of animals. On behalf of the organization the application already in regional prosecutor's office was written. After that addressed to the head of the Nikolaev city society of protection of animals the answer came from prosecutor's office that the address about disagreement with refusal in initiation of legal proceedings, is considered. Prosecutor of the Ship area S. V. Pogorelov отписал, approximately, following: considering that the resolution on refusal in initiation of legal proceedings is taken out prematurely, without establishment of all essential circumstances, and also in connection with incompleteness of the carried-out inspection, the specified resolution is cancelled, and materials of check are sent to Ship regional department of the Nikolaev municipal government of Regional Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine in the Nikolaev area for additional check.
An additional inspection carried out - interrogated the veterinarian who operated a wounded dog.
In the text of the next resolution on refusal in initiation of legal proceedings it is specified that during poll the doctor - the veterinarian explained that"the mechanism of an origin of wound at a dog is the shot from the pneumatic weapon, and this wound didn't provide threat of life of a dog".And right there in the following offer it is specified that"the doctor explained that he doesn't define severity as he is a nonspecialist and earlier to dogs he wasn't engaged in determination of severity".There is a reasonable question - that then this person does in veterinary hospital and at what rights it there works if he isn't an expert? The second, quite natural question, - as then this person defined, what wound of threat of life of a dog doesn't provide if it didn't define severity of wound and can't define it as he isn't an expert?
As it is specified in the same resolution on refusal in initiation of legal proceedings it is necessary "to report about this decision to interested persons". However the resolution was sent only to the owner of a dog -To Natalya Kirpishchikova, as for society of protection of animals, it simply ignored (though the head of NGOZZhwas the initiator of that this decision was revised,Makhov's muse).
The head of NGOZZh addressed for explanations in prosecutor's office of the Ship area where to it answered that anybody anything her отписывать won't be, as already отписали the victim. What it is economy of paper or unwillingness to give the answer of NGOZZh to the complaint to refusal in initiation of legal proceedings?
It should be added that the resolution on refusal in initiation of legal proceedings was signed this time by the militia captainA.Yu. Astakhov, but causes of failure were word for word reprinted from the previous refusal signed by the chief of Ship regional departmentV. Coba:
"According to the current legislation, namely a disposition of Art. 299 of UK of Ukraine "Animals abuse", is considered a crime "mockery at the animals belonging to vertebrata, made with application of cruel methods or from hooligan motives, and also a natravlivaniye of the above animals at each other, made of hooligan or mercenary motives". (…) Proceeding from the above, in the above described actions of the unidentified person structure of the crime provided by Art. 299 of UK of Ukraine, no as in its actions it is impossible to establish hooligan or mercenary motive, circumstances of causing to a dog of damage don't testify to mockery with application of cruel methods".
Unfortunately, in our state pay attention to cruelty in relation to those who and on - to the right takes long ago the place on this planet a little.And the similar facts only confirm it. But who can tell with confidence, what the hand shooting, risen by an animal, won't encroach next time already on human life?