Each new policemen' step in investigating the death of the Belarusian journalist Oleg Bebenin raises new questions that hang in the air and remain unanswered.
In dozens of publications, released after the death of Oleg, the classic criminology question is set - "Who benefits from his death?" But the answer to such kind of question doesn't often lie on the surface of the investigated case. Sometimes in order to reach it, you need to finish the investigation. And the more thoroughly and accurately specialists are during the whole way of the investigation, the greater the probability of finding the answer to the main question is – "What has really happened?"
The trouble is that the today's criminalistics is in the "staff" status of power structures and Belarusians have long ceased to expect objective and transparent investigation of cases from these structures. Especially when it comes to assassinations of political figures and journalists. Just to remind the cases of death of Gennady Karpenko, Viktor Gonchar, Anatoly Krasowski, Yuri Zakharenko, Dmitry Zavadsky, Veronika Cherkasova, Yana Polyakova were not disclosed.
There are too few expectations that there will be an objective investigation of the death of Oleg Bebenin. But we must ask the questions that have arisen in relatives, colleagues and friends' minds during the first stage of the investigation. At that point there should not be any political emotions and we should try to formulate questions as correctly and as accurately as possible. Only in this case they will be useful for those who desire to find the truth in the case of Oleg Bebenin's death.
So.
In search of his brother in the evening on the 3rd of September Alexander Bebenin came to the country house and entered it. Seeing Oleg, hanging in the noose, he ran out of the house, dialed the phone number of his wife Veronica, saying «Oleg hanged», he hung up. Respiring, Alexander went back into the house, looked around, went out and then dialed his wife again. This time, he said: «Nika, Oleg has not hung himself, he was hanged».
Why does the person, inspecting the crime scene only with a cursory glance, find that the victim was forcibly hanged?
This seems to be an emotionally colored question is under a very concrete basis: the very scene of a person killing himself looked like a poorly organized staging: sterile clean, two openly exposed empty bottles of "Belarusian balm", a glass, a hanging body. When a man voluntarily leaves the life, he tries either to ask forgiveness or to force someone to make apologies with the help of his action. Therefore, in most cases of suicide there is a note explaining the behavior of a person. But there was no suicide note in the room.
Why a pedantic, extremely just person who is a journalist by profession, dies leaving no explanation for his action?
The very picture of Oleg hanging in the loop was so strange that Alexander had no doubts about the violent nature of death. First of all, he was not hung in a noose but he practically leaned on the floor with half-bent legs. In order to be suspended, it was necessary to shorten the rope at least 30 centimeters. Secondly, at his feet there was a stool with one leg tucked. It lay there, not flown off to some distance, but directly at his feet, turned to the hanging body with the seat.
What for was the stool for a man who hanged himself while standing on the floor?
We can assume that he used a stool to tie the noose on the
