Who was frightened by the tits?

The verdict for "threats to the children of the security forces" is not justified by the case materials

What will happen when at school (at the institute), where the children of the judge of the Presnensky court of Elena Abramova (if she have) study, they find out that their mother measured Vladislav Sinitsa five years in prison for a non -Urazitsa on Twitter? Children are not responsible for their parents, but this is understandable to adults, and young comrades may have questions for the children of a judge.

In this reasoning, we only repeated in the correct form the thought that the titon expressed, resorting to, if you say scientifically, to hyperbole, albeit quite disgusting: in the tweet that many media quote on the materials of the court, he expressed doubt whether the “children of the security forces” will return home, or instead of them a video of reprisals against them will come by mail.

The so -called witnesses (two “security forces” heard by the court), who testified that they accepted this vice on a direct threat to their children, said approximately the following:

"We took yesterday's rain in Moscow for the World Flood."

Well, you never know who has imagined what, although it is probably not worth working with such a psyche in the "law enforcement agencies".

Part 2 of Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation indicates “actions aimed at initiating hatred or enmity” using the Internet (Twitter also gets here), but only in cases where they are associated with violence or threat of violence. The threat should be real, it is not robbery, when even a scarecrow is equated to the weapon. The statement of the tit with an ethical point of view, but it does not contain any real threat.

The so -called experts (at the choice of the investigation) from the "Center for Sociocultural Expertise" for money from our taxes, the city of Abrakadabra. The examination is assigned to answer special questions, but here there is enough common sense and judge Abramova in vain hopes that she shifted the responsibility for this sentence to “experts”. (The tit with a cut of nonsense in the context of the discussion about whether those who hammer with rubber batons should be recognizable, and the judge is published and by definition - it is always under the decision, and only his signature.)

Part 1 of Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation last December after hot discussions about the “posts” was decriminalized: now for the same actions committed without violence or threat of violence, criminal liability can occur only after bringing to similar actions to administrative responsibility

(This is not five years, but up to 15 days).

For five years, a title may indicate that somewhere upstairs a decision was made (articulated or only implied) to “punish with all cruelty”. But maybe Judge Abramov was simply reinsured:

The tit, of course, went over the stick, but the judge Abramova went too far

(In appeal, the punishment will certainly be reduced). Such a sentence will be much more correctly sowing the hatred “to the children of the security forces” (and a growing public consciousness, alas, is more confident in the judges) than this can do irresponsible trepidation among the immature “tits” themselves.

Article 212 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on “mass riots” (still threatening, including a tit) must be returned to the competence of the jury, it should also be transferred there (if there is a request from the accused) and the case under Article 282 of the Criminal Code, and many others are similar to them. Let's repeat this as “Carthage should be destroyed,” because the further, all the more obvious that professional judges cannot cope with this.