Lusine Sahakyan, Avetisyans’ lawyer, spoke on the case filed by the Armenian side and series of pretrial examinations which are partially available for the public. “The most decisive conclusion we’ve got from the examinations is that all the gun shots in the Avetisyans’ house were fired with one weapon and it is the gun found in the house.”
There was a forensic biological examination of the clothes, shoes, gloves, bag, weapon and cigarette left at the Avetsiyans’ house. “The sweat found on the clothes corresponds to Permyakov’s blood group but we cannot yet state it finally. Unless there is the conclusion of the forensic genetic examination, it cannot be officially recorded,” Sahakyan said.
The evidence processed so far relates mainly to Permyakov, the human rights defenders said, whereas it is still unknown why that person should have committed the murder of a whole family, the cause and effect correlation is not revealed.
“Permyakov himself testified he went into the Avetisyans’ house to drink water, later he was rumored to have broken into the house to take some clothes. But why did he kill these people? As for the children’s murder, the sequence of actions gets even more illogical. Why should the killer have left his clothes, shoes, gun at the murder scene and flee?” Sahakyan added.
Yervan Varosyan, AVetisyans’ lawyer, told the journalists that at the moment no one has a distinct idea of the pretrial investigation, particularly of the cooperation between the Russian and Armenian prosecutors.
“I want to focus on the inefficiency of the Armenian Police. We would now be neither the beggar nor the claimer if the Armenian Police had acted the way they were to. In that case Permyakov should now be in a jail.”
Artur Sakunts, Head of HCA Vanadzor, urged the Police to compare the conclusions of the scene and forensic medical examinations. “The Armenian law enforcement agencies have not filed a motion on Permaykov’s attempt to cross the border. And when asked, the Investigation Committee replies it is untimely to file a case on this reason or add a provision in the motion.”
Sakunts added little is known about the agreement between the Armenian and Russian parties and the array of prerogatives of both sides.
The discussion was followed by the screening of the film prepared by the Union of Informed Citizens, NGO.
Daniel Ioannisyan, Project Coordinator at the Union of Informed Citizens, NGO, said apart from the agreement, the Armenian General Prosecutor’s letter to his Russian counterpart is held secret.
“Russia positions itself as lawful to carry out an investigation in the territory of Armenia while as specified in the Armenian-Russian agreements, the case must be investigated by the Armenian side. Thus, Russia considers Gyumri, Avetisyans’ house, Russian military base its territory. But it is not true,” Ioannisyan said.
The film aims to show Permyakov is not the only person to be held responsible for the crime. “Even if he has perpetrated the shooting of the family, he is not alone to be sentenced. The Russian base police who knew about the deserter and did not report to the Armenian Police must be brought to the court,” Ioannisyan added.
The issue is not only legal but political in general, the speakers stressed. If Armenia were a democratic and legal state, it would carry out an efficient investigation, without concerns arising.
Lilit Arakelyan, Editor-Coordinator
Please contact the author at firstname.lastname@example.org.