They claimed that they had changed their conduct and way of life, had ceased drinking alcohol, had found employment and had a stable income allowing them to support their children financially.

It had been obvious from Mr   Antonov’s case file that he had had suicidal tendencies. 12.

, the second meeting had never taken place.

The other shot had hit R. and had then ricocheted off a wall.

On the other hand, he denied that he had struck them. Police officer C.M. stated that he had not been responsible for any investigation into the applicants.

  As to whether the force used by the police officers had been proportionate, the Court noted in the first place that they had never contended that they had reasons to believe the applicants were

They maintained that they had not seen who had shot him, as the two sides had been firing at each other. Around midnight, an on-site report was prepared by gendarmerie officers.

He added that when he had been asked by the customs officers if he had anything to declare, he had answered in the negative, whereupon a personal search and a search of the vehicle had been performed and

Thus, the sanctions imposed had not had the intended effect on the company and had not meaningfully contributed to improving the environmental conditions at the quarry and in the Klin District.

Court had passed its judgment.

There was no doubt that the ill-treatment had been particularly serious since it had resulted in his death.

Instead, the authorities had continued to send him to the Sevastopol ITT, which had no medical staff.

In her opinion, the police officials who had detained her husband, had taken his keys and had used them to enter the house.

Captain L. had then ordered the private to search for a ring from a lamp and the private had left. M. had later learned what had happened to Private Alekseyev. 45.

As he had been in pain, he had continued to ask for medical assistance.

had found that he had not sustained any injuries, but several witnesses had testified that they had seen physical marks on his body after the incident.

She noted that she had contacted the public prosecutor who had then stated, as reasons for the arrests, that new information had surfaced.

There was no doubt that it had had a basis in law and had served the legitimate aim of protecting the reputation or rights of others.

Accordingly, the Court had to examine whether he had accepted the plea bargain in a genuinely voluntary manner in full awareness of the facts and legal consequences and whether there had been sufficient