Those who read the Western authoritative mass media websites, probably, have noticed that in the message of any crime, even if it is obvious who committed the crime, there are some reservations made in the description: “according to the investigation”, “according to law enforcement officials”, allegedly (as if presumably), and so on. Thus, solid media keeps from assuming the role of prosecutor and respects the presumption of innocence of the suspected. We do not have such culture, starting from official messages of law enforcement authorities. In a type of programs like “02”, it is directly said that so-and-so entered, broke, stabbed, stole and fled making an action stipulated by given clause of given Article of the Criminal Code. But wait, such a claim can be made by a court only.
On June 2, shamshyan.com website was the first (or one of the first) to announce about the shootings in Goris. The material was obviously one-sided and extremely beneficial for the Governor of Syunik Marz. Killed and seriously injured Budaghyan brothers were spoken about in an unacceptable tone, i.e. with “hot heads”, drunk.
In short, Surik Khachatryan’s hypothesis was completely introduced in that narration, which he presented yesterday at the café of “Marriott” hotel. ‘Piratical attack’ qualification, which he called, as I understand, is also a legal category. In this case, it turns out that Budaghyan brothers attacked the Governor’s house and not on at the Governor. Let’s assume it is a preliminary hypothesis, but why it is put forward by a man who was deep asleep during all those events. In addition, in case of a piratical attack, a normal citizen applies law enforcement officials, and not opens a fire with weapons illegally kept in the house and through “bodyguards” of unknown status.
But the most surprising was the statement made yesterday by Syunik Governor’s Office, which described the video of cameras at the Governor’s house, which the Governor’s staff (who exactly?) had allegedly seen. Here there might be three versions. Immediately after the incident, the governor’s staff had come especially to Goris from Kapan, watched the video after which it was confiscated as tangible evidence. Or, in the preliminary investigation body has invited the Governor’s staff to Yerevan and has shown the confiscated video and allowed them to describe it in the message. Or, the most probably, the Governor, who, allegedly, was temporarily suspended from his duties has dictated his hypothesis to his own staff, which later became a statement.
Read also
Here, one of the primary role-players of such case, being at large, influences of the investigation.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
