klsk548 wrote:...According to the facts as definitively established by the competent Latvian courts,
Вы цитируете данные предоставленные Латвийским судом.
В содержательной части оправдательного приговора Европейского суда беременность одной из ликвидированных женщин не упомянается.
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view. ... udoc-pr-enAs regards the three women killed at Mazie Bati, the Court could only regret the overly general and summary nature of the domestic courts’ reasoning, which did not allow any definite answers to be given to two fundamental questions, namely whether and to what extent the women had participated in the betrayal of the group of Red Partisans, and whether their execution had been planned by the Red Partisans from the start or whether the members of the unit had acted beyond their authority.
The Court considered that there were two possible explanations for what happened. The first was that the three women concerned had played a role in the betrayal and that their execution had been planned from the start. The Government had not refuted the applicant’s assertion that the three women had kept watch while the men had gone to the neighbouring village to alert the German garrison to the Partisans’ presence. If that account was true, the Court was bound to conclude that the three women were also guilty of abusing their status of “civilians” by providing genuine, concrete assistance to the six men from Mazie Bati who collaborated with the Nazi occupier. In such circumstances, the Court’s finding with respect to the men who were executed during the operation on 27 May 1944 was in general equally applicable to the three women.
The second explanation was that the women’s deaths had not initially been planned by the applicant’s men and their commanding officers and that their deaths resulted from an abuse of authority. The Court considered that neither such abuse of authority nor the military operation in which it took place could reasonably be regarded as a violation of the laws and customs of war as codified in the Hague Regulations. Under this scenario, the Court accepted that the acts committed by the members of the unit against the three women concerned could prima facie constitute offences under the general law, which, as such, had to be examined by reference to the domestic law applicable at the material time.
On the assumption that the deaths of the three women from Mazie Bati were the result of an abuse of authority by the Red Partisans, the Court notes that, as with the six men, the decisions of the Latvian courts contained no indication of the exact degree of implication of the applicant in their execution. Thus, it had never been alleged that he himself had killed the women or that he had ordered or incited his comrades to do so.
In any event, the Court considered that even if the applicant’s conviction was based on domestic law, it was manifestly contrary to the requirements of Article 7 as, even supposing that he had committed one or more offences under the general law in 1944, their prosecution had been definitively statute barred since 1954 and it would be contrary to the principle of foreseeability to punish him for these offences almost half a century after the expiry of the limitation period.
Европейскому суду остается только сожалеть, что тупорылые фашисты судьи из Латвии даже не в состоянии провести расследование согласно процедуре
Но даже если бы фашисты в этой части и добились бы успеха доказав что партизаны ликвидировали женщин по обстоятельствам без приговора трибунала то срок преследования по данному
недоказанному факту истек 1954 году.
В целом фашиствующим ублюдкам мое большое спасибо я каждый раз с удовольствием перечитываю этот Европейского суда оправдательный приговор
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." Edward Abbey
