Secret witness evidences at Nalchik attack trial

The Supreme Court of Kabardino-Balkaria, where the trial on the events on October 13, 2005, is held, today has started a judicial investigation on the episode about preparation to the attack on the Department on Fighting against Organized Crime (known as "UBOP") of the MIA of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic (KBR).

A witness of the prosecution, who acted under pseudonym "Alexandrov", was invited into the courtroom.

The witness said that at night on October 13, 2005, he was with his family in his summer cottage in "Landysh" settlement. At about a midnight, he was awakened by barking dog, went out into the yard and saw a fire burning in the yard of the neighbouring cottage.

"At first I thought that some vagabonds had put the house on fire," said the witness. When he came closer, he noticed silhouettes of some 5-6 persons. "I came back home, took my SKS carabine (short rifle) and made two shots in the air," he continued.

According to his story, in response to his shots two local district militiamen appeared who happened to be nearby. "Alexandrov" informed them about the suspicious persons. They asked him to call enforcement and went to that summer cottage.

When militia units arrived and a skirmish burst out, the witness did not get out of the house, therefore, he could not say who and at whom was shooting.

He also said that next morning he saw that militiamen took away from the cottage three buckets of some powder that looked like aluminium powder and one pistol.

The court session listened also to evidences of "Alexandrov" that he had given at the stage of preliminary investigation; they differed essentially from what he said to the parties of the litigation in person. In particular, in his preliminary evidences nothing was said about district militiamen, but information was given that he had seen plenty of firearms in the summer cottage, etc.

However, all the questions asked by the prosecution, defence and defendants, were answered by the witness with one single phrase: "I don't remember". The court presented to him his evidences for review, asking if he had read them before signing; the witness said that he had read them, but failed to intelligibly explain the discrepancies.