Troublesome issues

Each new policemen’ step in investigating the death of the Belarusian journalist Oleg Bebenin raises new questions that hang in the air and remain unanswered.

In dozens of publications, released after the death of Oleg, the classic criminology question is set - "Who benefits from his death?" But the answer to such kind of question doesn’t often lie on the surface of the investigated case. Sometimes in order to reach it, you need to finish the investigation. And the more thoroughly and accurately specialists are during the whole way of the investigation, the greater the probability of finding the answer to the main question is – "What has really happened?"

The trouble is that the today's criminalistics is in the "staff" status of power structures and Belarusians have long ceased to expect objective and transparent investigation of cases from these structures. Especially when it comes to assassinations of political figures and journalists. Just to remind the cases of death of Gennady Karpenko, Viktor Gonchar, Anatoly Krasowski, Yuri Zakharenko, Dmitry Zavadsky, Veronika Cherkasova, Yana Polyakova were not disclosed.

There are too few expectations that there will be an objective investigation of the death of Oleg Bebenin. But we must ask the questions that have arisen in relatives, colleagues and friends’ minds during the first stage of the investigation. At that point there should not be any political emotions and we should try to formulate questions as correctly and as accurately as possible. Only in this case they will be useful for those who desire to find the truth in the case of Oleg Bebenin’s death.

So.

In search of his brother in the evening on the 3rd of September Alexander Bebenin came to the country house and entered it. Seeing Oleg, hanging in the noose, he ran out of the house, dialed the phone number of his wife Veronica, saying «Oleg hanged», he hung up. Respiring, Alexander went back into the house, looked around, went out and then dialed his wife again. This time, he said: «Nika, Oleg has not hung himself, he was hanged».

Why does the person, inspecting the crime scene only with a cursory glance, find that the victim was forcibly hanged?

This seems to be an emotionally colored question is under a very concrete basis: the very scene of a person killing himself looked like a poorly organized staging: sterile clean, two openly exposed empty bottles of “Belarusian balm”, a glass, a hanging body. When a man voluntarily leaves the life, he tries either to ask forgiveness or to force someone to make apologies with the help of his action. Therefore, in most cases of suicide there is a note explaining the behavior of a person. But there was no suicide note in the room.

Why a pedantic, extremely just person who is a journalist by profession, dies leaving no explanation for his action?

The very picture of Oleg hanging in the loop was so strange that Alexander had no doubts about the violent nature of death. First of all, he was not hung in a noose but he practically leaned on the floor with half-bent legs. In order to be suspended, it was necessary to shorten the rope at least 30 centimeters. Secondly, at his feet there was a stool with one leg tucked. It lay there, not flown off to some distance, but directly at his feet, turned to the hanging body with the seat.

What for was the stool for a man who hanged himself while standing on the floor?

We can assume that he used a stool to tie the noose on the stairs, but it was much easier to do it climbing up on it. And there's another oddity. The whole staircase was tightly stacked with different suburban things: a record player, speakers and bedding. They are not touched and lie as they always lie. So instead of moving things aside, making a few steps up the staircase, tying a rope, lowering it down, standing on a stool and committing suicide, Oleg acted in a different way. He stands on a stool, knocks out the board in order to be able to fix the rope with a very complicated knot (at that moment one of the legs of the stool breaks). What’s more, he tied up the rope on one of the beams. Then comes to the loop and commits suicide, standing on the floor.

Perhaps, after all, someone moved the things away from the stairs, tied a rope and then returned the things back?

One of those police officers present at the scene voiced his version that Oleg jumped down the stairs. But in this case it would be recorded in infraction of the upper lobe of the spine caused by a jump and considerable weight of the victim - about 110 kilograms.

Loop is another oddity. The fact is that the experts cut it from Oleg’s neck, so it was not a slipknot which is used in such cases. So Oleg had to tie it at his own neck. And all he did, according to two empty bottles of "Belarusian balm", when he was totally drunk.

In my life I have seen just a few specialists in the evaluation of alcoholic beverages as Oleg was. Pedantic gourmet, he could easily read the neophyte an hour lecture on the nature and characteristics of the production of whiskey in different regions of Britain and America. The suggestion that he drank a liter of “Belarusian balm” with a small glass does not hold water. He would never drink such a beverage even if he is forced to. What’s more, in the country house there was not a single gram of food.

Can a person, who drinks only high quality alcohol, imbibe a liter of "Belarusian balm" with a small glass without snacks?

The rope itself leaves questions not only concerning the technical aspects but also emotional ones. It was pulled out of the child’s hammock on which Oleg’s beloved son Stepan was riding in the country. It was evident that someone was searching for a rope in a hurry, turning over things in the closet. Oleg’s friend Fedor Pavlyuchenko, present on the tragedy scene, wrote: "In the hallway where the hanging body had been found, stood a closet. The door of one of the upper shelves was half open and there laid curtains, rags, extension upside-down. There was a feeling that someone searched hurriedly on that shelf. The hammock, rope from which was used, lay in the adjoining room.

In sterile tidy cottage house, why are the things reversed only in a covert closet from where the hammock had been taken despite the fact that Oleg did not need to seek it as he knew where it lay?

And another question.

How could a loving father use packthread for suicide, taken from the hammock of his immensely beloved son?

It is known that during asphyxia person’s sphincter relaxes and the bowel and bladder are emptied. There was no food at the cottage house, but experts found remnants of food in Oleg’s stomach and intestines. And, therefore, the emptying should have happened. But having come to the country house, my wife's sister with her friend and my brother have not felt any savor. Emptying happened much later, when the experts have already removed the body from the loop.

Why did not happen bowel and bladder evacuation at the time of death?

Contradictions that arose with the time of death do not cause anything but bewilderment. The police, who pulled off the body, told the present relatives and friends: "He died a few hours ago as the body is warm under the armpits and there are still no signs of rigor mortis."They suggested touching the body and making sure on our own. This occurred between 6 and 7 p.m. on the 3rd of September. But the specialist, who conducted the examination, told that the time of death was on the 2nd of September. That is the interval of determining time of death was at least about 15 hours. Hence the next question comes.

Can the opinions of experts in determining the date of death differ for 15 hours, despite the fact that the maximum error in criminology is 1-2 hours?

By the way, the initial stiffness occurs after two or three hours, the next phase will be after 6-7 hours. If to believe the examination, by the time the police arrived there had to be a phase in which policemen could not even bend victim’s arms.

When Dmitry Bondarenko with Alexander Bebenin went to collect the evaluation data, the conversation between Deputy Attorney of Dzerzhinsky district and Alexander happened. The Deputy Attorney said that the examination has not been ready yet. So Alexander and Dmitry had to wait about two hours for the document at the building where the experts were working. But by that time several hours had passed as the Ministry of Internal Affairs disclosed information about Oleg Bebenin’s suicide.

Why did the representatives of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs so hurriedly announce Bebenin’s suicide, not even waiting for the results of examination?

Later, the Attorney of Dzerzhinsky district Kovrigin said that «the examination confirmed the version of suicide», while adding that «besides strangulated furrows on Bebenin’s neck, there were not found any other damages on the body.» But present relatives and friends saw unnaturally twisted Oleg’s foot at 90 degrees, a scratch on his hand, longitudinal notches on his chest and a dark spot in the region of his liver.

Why haven’t these details been reflected in the results of examination?

To say that the scratches on his arm he got knocking out the board in the stairwell is not logical, as all the present saw black traces on his arm that resembled soot. A miserly amount of ash in the fireplace shows that Oleg hasn’t burned it. The testimony of a neighbour is that smoke from the chimney was unseen neither in the evening or at night nor during the next morning.

In this case, the temperature in the house hardly exceeds 10 degrees Centigrade. If a man decided to get drunk and go out of life, it would be logical not to heat the fireplace. Taking into consideration Oleg’s great tourist experience, to kindle the fire for him was a matter of one minute. So the algorithm of his behavior becomes incomprehensible.

Why did not Oleg warm up a fireplace, while being a long time in a cold room, and, eventually, why did he end up in a buttoned jacket?

On the eve of the day, at about 4 p.m. on the 2nd of September, Oleg phoned his mother-in-law and asked her to pick up his son Stepan. He told that he would come later and take him home. During the same evening a meeting with friends was scheduled by Oleg. They planned to go to the cinema and next day to see a football match France - Belarus. But instead, under the version of the investigators, Oleg immediately went to the country house and committed suicide. Moreover, at some point he ceased to lift the receiver of his mobile and answer the calls, only texting messages. Especially strange is that after one of these calls he sent a text message "I am driving now, I cannot answer." That is weird because Oleg did not have an ordinary phone, but iPhone with the virtual keyboard. To type on it a text-message while driving a car is impossible.

Why didn’t Bebenin pick up the phone and why did he communicate with everyone with text-messages in the evening of the 2nd of September? Can we assume that at that time his telephone has already been monitored by someone else?

Oleg planned to go to the cinema with his friend Fedor Pavlyuchenko. Fedor asked him to lend $ 400. Oleg replied that he would take the money with him. When investigators examined the body, they discovered $ 400 in Oleg’s press card. This fact leads to the next question.

If to believe in the investigation version of suicide, what compelled Oleg so urgently to commit suicide, dropping all just outlined plans?

According to investigators, at the same time, when Oleg was at the cottage house, his neighbour was at home. To the first question of Alexander about whether she had seen Oleg, she replied that she had noticed that there was a light at night at the cottage. The second time she saw the light in the window when she was smoking at about 3 o'clock in the morning. She also said that his car drove up from the house at about 8 a.m. After policemen’ arrival, she has changed her testimony for several times. Eventually, she came to the fact that she had not seen anything.

Why does a direct witness change thrice her testimony during the day?

Oleg loved his youngest son immensely. Recently, they were practically inseparable. Stepan was the most important person in Oleg’s life.

Can we assume that the father who is immensely fond of his son, decides to leave life without explanation?

I understand that this question is more emotional than rational. As well as the next one.

What can be the reason for a psychologically stable person to make such a step, taking into consideration absolutely normal situation in the family, with colleagues and friends?

But people who know Oleg, his psycho, would never allow a thought Oleg Bebenin could decide to commit suicide. He was a positive, logical, calm and balanced person, who could find a way out of unsolvable situations. Herewith, a man of rare courage who was able to go to the very center of the fight to pull out and save from being batted an unfamiliar girl. In addition, his temper quickly subsides and rolling of the statement of the problem to finding a model of its solution.

Bebenin was not just a journalist. Over the past fifteen years in public and political activities, he was initially participating in an organization of journalists’ actions of corporate solidarity and later in the organization of major political campaigns. His work was not always seen. But law enforcement officers always knew about it. They had information that Bebenin decided to become a part of the electoral campaign of presidential candidate Andrei Sannikov, there being one of the key figures.

Oleg himself was one of the creators of the most influential of the Belarusian public and political Internet resources www.charter97.org, which has been subjected to incredible pressure in recent years. Even at the funeral day threats to the journalists were coming at the Charter e-mail.

Could sociopolitical and journalistic activities cause the death of Oleg Bebenin?

In 1996 during the parliamentary crisis namely Oleg became the first journalist with whom the authorities tried a technique which later became the calling card of the current government. He was caught in the middle of the city and taken to the forest by security officers. They took his phone and money, warning him to stop writing on political topics.

High level of attention to his work by the authorities has not been decreasing but increasing. The very next day after the funeral, the Belarusian TV has broadcast the film about the web-site of the Charter. It is obvious that such a film was prepared beforehand. And that it was not created in two days’ period after the death of Oleg.

Is it a coincidence that demonstration of the movie happened at one time period with the tragedy?

We can continue asking questions. Current Belarusian authorities make sure that the list of troublesome issues has been growing infinitely, but is it worth?

Over time that has passed after the death of Oleg, there haven’t been any intelligible law enforcement agents on television screens and newspapers who were ready to answer questions from journalists and public representatives. Instead there was a set of stereotyped tongue-tied replicas from people who do not have any relation to the investigation.

If questions remain unanswered by the court of inquiry and the case of the death of Oleg Bebenin as dozens of cases of repressions against opposition figures remain without a thorough investigation, we will be entitled to assume that current Belarusian authorities are related to this death.

Nikalai Khalezin, kilgor-trautt