07:00, 18.01.2019 10
The chairman of a recreation center who shot a dog near Kazan received 200 hours of compulsory work.
Photo: evening-kazan.ru
The court found Oleg Repin guilty of cruelty to animals, who shot a dog at a recreation center in the Laishevsky district of Tatarstan. However, the verdict has not yet entered into force. The investigator refused to initiate a criminal case at least three times, although not only animal rights activists, but also the prosecutor’s office and a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation insisted on this. It should be noted that the new version of the law on cruelty to animals makes it easier to prosecute killers of dogs and cats. Details are in the material of Realnoe Vremya.
So as not to suffer
The magistrate court in the Laishevsky district imposed two hundred hours of mandatory labor on Oleg Repin, who was found guilty of cruelty to animals (Part 1 of Article 245 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). This year, this is the first time in Tatarstan when a new version of the law was applied. Let us remind you that if previously it was necessary to prove in court that the animal was killed by sadistic methods and suffered, now those who kill our lesser brothers out of hooligan motives will also be held criminally liable.
According to the case file, on March 15, 2021, at approximately 9 a.m., 57-year-old Oleg Repin shot four times at a white dog (a cross between a husky and a mongrel) named Chuck. This happened at the Dubrava recreation center, of which Repin was the chairman. The frightened dog ran away to the neighboring recreation center "KGU-Kordon-1". Repin, with a gun in his hands, followed her and actually finished off the dog with two shots.
The defendant himself never admitted his guilt in court. According to his version, on March 14 he was called to hunt, so he came to the dacha to pick up his gun. After spending the night and opening the door of his country house the next morning, he saw a dog defecating near his threshold. When Repin began to chase her away, the dog allegedly began to snap and headed in his direction. Repin entered the house and came out with a weapon (that same gun), but did not use it immediately. In court, he said that he followed the dog to the neighboring recreation center “KGU-Kordon-1” to check whether it would attack anyone. There the dog, according to the chairman of Dubrava, suddenly turned around and bared his teeth. Then he shot him in the side, then again - so as not to suffer. He dragged the dead dog out of the way so that no one would see the corpse and so that it “didn’t bother anyone.” And he went to get a sled to remove the dog. At this time, Vadim Baranov arrived, who owned the dog named Chuck.
The chairman of Dubrava insisted that he did not want to kill the dog. And if he had wanted to, “he would have shot her in another place without witnesses.” It can be assumed that this is exactly what he would have done if he had known that he could face criminal prosecution for this.
The magistrate court in the Laishevsky district imposed two hundred hours of mandatory labor on Oleg Repin, who was found guilty of cruelty to animals. Photo yandex.ru
What is the punishment for killing an animal and how can the killer be brought to justice?
Practicing lawyer on issues of criminal, criminal procedural, and penal law. Member of the Moscow Bar Association. More than 500 cases won. Work experience more than 10 years.
All living beings are protected by law: wild animals, pets, livestock. The Federal Law “On Animal World” dated April 24, 1995 No. 52-FZ states that a humane attitude towards wildlife is mandatory for both citizens of the country (including hunters) and foreigners. There is a penalty for killing an animal under certain circumstances.
“Took out the trash”: killed a dog just like that?
The dog owner has a slightly different version. In court, he said that when he arrived at KSU Kordon-1 on March 15, he saw bloody footprints at the intersection. 20 meters from the tracks he found Chuck’s body. Baranov immediately went to Repin to find out “why he shot his dog.” To this Repin replied that dogs and cats defecate on his territory and that “you had to keep an eye on your dog.” At the same time, in a conversation with Baranov, Repin never mentioned that the dog snapped at him or attacked him.
One of the witnesses from KGU Kordon-1, who heard the shots, told how he asked Repin: “Did you shoot at the ducks?” He replied that he was shooting at cats and dogs that had “messed up” his territory, but he didn’t even mention Chuck’s attack. Another witness recalls that when at a meeting of the owners of the Dubrava PKBO the chairman was asked why he killed the dog, Repin even stated that he had “removed the garbage.”
As for the dog, most residents of nearby recreation centers called him peace-loving and good-natured, said that “everyone loved him” and that “even children played with him.” However, among the witnesses there were those who considered the dog stray and were afraid of it. Chuck's previous owner either died or abandoned him. But in 2021, Vadim Baranov adopted the dog. He built an enclosure for her and let her go home in winter. Baranov also presented the investigation with a passport, which indicated that Chuck was vaccinated against rabies in 2021. And during the autopsy, no visible signs of this disease were found in the dog.
The court found Repin guilty, noting that even if the dog grinned at him, he managed to enter the house and could have called for help by phone rather than reaching for the gun. In addition, he continued to chase the dog, despite the fact that it no longer showed signs of aggression. The shooter's gun was confiscated.
“As a representative of the victim, I asked him to confiscate his gun, the weapon of the crime.” I asked that it be confiscated, although the article does not provide for confiscation. The judge agreed and confiscated the gun and ammunition. And I think this is the main thing - to live next to a person who has not repented,” says the victim’s lawyer Inna Rybak.
When investigator Nurgaleeva once again refused to initiate a criminal case, Russian State Duma deputy Alexander Gribov, who is one of the authors of the new edition of Article 245 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, got involved. Photo duma-er.ru
Achieving justice is very difficult
In 2021, a separate law “On the Responsible Treatment of Animals” was adopted. Animal rights activists, among other things, hoped that against this background Article 245 would begin to work. But in reality, experts interviewed by Izvestia note, this never happened.
Cellular structure: do they abuse animals in traveling circuses?
Why is the legislative protection of four-legged artists still not working?
If the case comes to court, the punishment is most often limited to fines or compulsory work, but the main difficulty is to achieve an investigation in principle.
— There are real terms under this article, but mostly there are fines. Although there is an article, it provides for imprisonment. But, unfortunately, it is very difficult to achieve justice for her,” said Natalia Bazarkina, a representative of the Moscow Society for the Protection of Animals.
Up to this point, perhaps the most severe sentence was the one handed down in March 2019 to a previously convicted man in Yekaterinburg. While drinking alcohol with his girlfriend, he killed a stray dog with particular cruelty. The court sentenced him to 3.5 years in prison. His companion - to a year of correctional labor. At the same time, a year earlier, a man who first beat and then strangled a dog in front of children was sentenced to 150 hours of correctional labor.
shanti
Photo: social networks
In these conditions, perhaps the decisive factor, in addition to the availability of competent legal support, is the attention of the public and the media. In particular, Shanti’s case was brought to court because the case turned out to be “egregious,” Tatyana Palkina, one of the leaders of the First City Shelter in Novosibirsk, told Izvestia.
Deadly fight: a dog was killed in Sochi because of a fight with another dog
An attempt to separate the animals brought a local resident under Article 245
— A few things helped here. Firstly, there was a very massive protest movement. Residents of the house, residents of the area staged pickets, and only after that the police took measures to initiate a criminal case, explains the publication’s interlocutor.
Previously, animal rights activists said that in order to achieve the initiation of a criminal case after the murder of Shanti, activists needed to organize seven pickets, which were attended by city residents. In addition, people wrote about 200 statements to law enforcement agencies demanding that a case be opened.
Another weak point of Article 245 is the lack of law enforcement practice on it, notes Anastasia Apukhtina-Ageichkina, and the lack of clear wording in the article itself. For example, it talks about mutilation, but in reality there is no unambiguous interpretation of this concept.
— For some, the absence of a lung can be a disability, but for others it is not. As a result, law enforcement agencies often refer to the fact that the animal did not die - it turns out that in order for the attacker to be punished, the animal does not need to be helped, but must wait until it dies, the lawyer argues.
All this leads to the fact that if there is a competent defense, it is quite easy for the offender to ruin the case in the process or reduce the punishment to a suspended sentence, correctional labor or a fine, which cannot always be enforced. Therefore, sympathizers often recommend that owners not contact law enforcement agencies at all, but rather deal with the offender themselves.
Shot from the forest: a flayer near Moscow started a hunt for domestic dogs
An unknown person shoots animals from an ambush in front of their owners.
Upcoming changes in legislation
Today, legislative projects are at the discussion stage that provide for tougher penalties for cruel acts against fauna:
The Federal Law of December 27, 2021 N 498-FZ “On the responsible treatment of animals and on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” is currently in force.
According to the bill, the owner must:
Administrative liability for animal abuse
At the federal level, administrative sanctions are not provided. However, any subject of the Russian Federation has the right to establish administrative liability for cruelty to animals, but it is established only in some regions:
However, not all regions of the country provide for administrative sanctions. But this does not mean that inadequate people, sadists and dog hunters can act with impunity. For such individuals, there is criminal liability in all regions.
In what cases is there no punishment for killing an animal?
The crime must be committed only with direct intent, that is, the criminal is aware of the consequences and desires them. The following will not be held criminally liable:
In the case of self-defense , which leads to the death of the attacking animal, it is not the person who defended himself who is punished, but the owner who did not take care of proper education, equipment when walking, or training the pet. For example, if the defender causes more than average harm to health, the owner of the animal will have to answer under Article 118 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of June 13, 1996 No. 63-FZ (as amended on December 27, 2018) “Causing grievous harm to health through negligence.” When defending against aggressive stray dogs, the defender is also not punished.
Hitting an animal relates strictly to a road accident; in this case, administrative liability is not applied. The driver is punished only for violating traffic rules, if any. If the animal is not stray, the owner will have to pay financial damages for killing. If a wild animal is shot down, the damage is assessed depending on its value and rarity in accordance with the order of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia dated December 8, 2011 No. 948 (as amended on November 17, 2017) “On calculating the amount of damage caused to hunting resources.”
