1

Topic: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

On Sakhalin the court by mistake produced to parents of a victim phone of the murderer then it became clear that its accomplice the son of policemen was more detailed: http://www.newsru.com/crime/08sep2017/t … mvctm.html about poor-quality investigation of grave crime. In responsibility for murder of the young man attracted only one figurant of business, and its friends transited on business as witnesses. Afterwards judges returned by mistake phone of the murderer to the dissatisfied party. As a result parents of a victim found out in storage of a gadget the correspondence, testifying that murderers was a little, and the offspring of employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on a nickname Wild was one of them ostensibly.

2

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Thanks for the information. And that earlier I thought that children of workers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are infallible, study as one quintuples and for days on end translate through road of old women.

3

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, xma, you wrote: xma> On Sakhalin the court by mistake produced to parents of a victim phone of the murderer then it became clear that the son of policemen You it was its accomplice write as the fact. Though even in the initial message takes place to be a word "ostensibly".

4

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, xma, you wrote: xma>... Found out in storage of a gadget correspondence... And from this place on more in detail it is possible? I.e. phone has not been protected in any way, neither the password there, nor a print of fingers, a face ... Or Russian hackers helped? Oh these fairy tales... Oh these storytellers...

5

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, BOBKA_XPEH, you wrote: xma>>... Found out in storage of a gadget correspondence... BOB> And from this place on more in detail it is possible? I.e. phone has not been protected in any way, neither the password there, nor a print of fingers, a face ... Or Russian hackers helped? Oh these fairy tales... Oh these storytellers... Well, I do not protect phone. For the PIN code at payment by a card still all right, but at each reversal to phone is  I, truth, anybody yet did not kill and I do not plan

6

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, xma, you wrote: At first - militias at us are not present for a long time, At us now police. Secondly - the consequence is conducted by Office of Public Prosecutor, instead of militia/police Thirdly - you consider that what someone is covered, in it Putin is guilty personally? At Navalnom of the such it will not be finite, yes? I will ask to uncover thought more in detail  Here somehow considered / "Three billboards on boundary something", there it too like about bribability, injustice and so on. Itself did not look, but like as there the aunt the customer of billboards was gone, or not. Did not look. But what injustice explicitly was, whether not so? And so, there Obama or Tramp is guilty? Or too Putin?

7

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, BOBKA_XPEH, you wrote: BOB> And from this place on more in detail it is possible? I.e. phone has not been protected in any way, neither the password there, nor a print of fingers, a face ... Or Russian hackers helped? Oh these fairy tales... Oh these storytellers... If there is no scanner of prints all remaining is terribly inconvenient and consequently goes to a fire chamber. To type  and to pose in front of phone - that still a perversion, and the scanner is as the button to push.

8

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M> Thirdly - you consider that what someone is covered, in it Putin is guilty personally? At Navalnom of the such it will not be finite, yes? Under the link did not pass, but in arguing on  in Putin's this subject did not see. You whence  Putin? Or can eat here the latent messages and I them do not see? Or it at you already everywhere Putin seems?

9

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, BOBKA_XPEH, you wrote: BOB> Hello, xma, you wrote: xma>>... Found out in storage of a gadget correspondence... BOB> And from this place on more in detail it is possible? I.e. phone has not been protected in any way, neither the password there, nor a print of fingers, a face ... Or Russian hackers helped? Oh these fairy tales... Oh these storytellers... At me and at the wife phones are not protected. On yours it is fairy tales?

10

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, xma, you wrote: xma> On Sakhalin the court by mistake produced to parents of a victim phone of the murderer then it became clear, what the son of policemen Again was its accomplice? There was already similar history.

11

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, marselo, you wrote: M> Again? There was already similar history. So it it also is - article that of September of last year.

12

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, s_aa, you wrote: s> Thanks for the information. And that earlier I thought that children of workers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are infallible, study as one quintuples and for days on end translate through road of old women. Here only speech not about that  or not. That moment, what phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, and that preferred this correspondence not to note, you does not confuse?

13

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, nme, you wrote: nme> Here only speech not about that  or not. That moment, what phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, and that preferred this correspondence not to note, you does not confuse? Here confuses more, what   generally produce to whom-got. In it the systematicity, not is visible?

14

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, nme, you wrote: nme> Here only speech not about that  or not. That moment, what phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, and that preferred this correspondence not to note, you does not confuse? And still, why phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, instead of at inspectors? Unless the Office of Public Prosecutor should be engaged  and carry on an investigation?

15

Re: Our "militia" - us protects (IS not present)

Hello, SabaiSabai, you wrote: SS> nme> Here only speech not about that  or not. That moment, what phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, and that preferred this correspondence not to note, you does not confuse? SS> and still why phone was at Office of Public Prosecutor, instead of at inspectors? Unless the Office of Public Prosecutor should be engaged  and carry on an investigation? It is not basic, I only wanted to specify on  in a post which answered.