8 December 2021, Wednesday, 3:26
Sim Sim, Charter 97!

Why Did the Programmer Shoot the Video and the Security Forces Came without Bulletproof Vests?

Why Did the Programmer Shoot the Video and the Security Forces Came without Bulletproof Vests?

Important questions after the shooting in Minsk.

The shooting at Yakubouskaha st. in Minsk is an extraordinary case. I don't remember KGB officers being killed in the last 10 years. At the same time, after watching pieces of videos published by pro-government telegram channels, many questions remain. Perhaps the answers to them would have appeared after watching the full unedited video. However, there isn't one at the moment. The author of Nasha Niva Artsiom Harbatsevich carefully studied the published materials.

Does the situation look true?

The video does not look staged, but we do not fully understand how exactly the events unfolded since an already edited piece was shown to the public - the shooting took place in the afternoon, the video was published in the evening, and there were at least 6 hours for editing.

At the very least, the moment of the programmer's murder was cut out -we don't know how he died.

Did the camera in the apartment belong to Zeltser? It seems that it did, otherwise, the security forces would have known about the presence of weapons and acted differently, but more on that later.

Why, in fact, did the programmer took up arms?

There is no answer to this question - we were not shown the arguments of the family, which could have been voiced on the video from the apartment, which was recorded by his wife or Andrei Zeltser himself.

At least, Zeltser took an unfavorable position in order to shoot back — he was not covered by anything.

It is not known whether he planned to kill at all or only used the argument of a gun in his hands to conduct a conversation with masked people.

It is not known what the Minsk resident fired - he could have loaded the gun with a bullet, buckshot, shot. it is unclear from the video what it was, but he fired a doublet - a double shot. The video shows the moment of the shot, the recoil of the weapon, powder gases.

However, without the full video, it is unclear how many shots Zeltser actually fired.

At the moment of the shots in the entrance, the sound of the turned-on grinder is still heard - it could drown out the sound of the shot, and this can explain the courage of the security officer with the camera, who rushed to shoot in the apartment.

Who shot first?

Is it possible to determine from the published video montage who fired first? It's difficult to do this until you get acquainted with the full videos. The testimony of the wife and witnesses will shed more light.

Could it be that the enforcer was killed by his own fire and not as a result of a shot by Zeltser? The answer to this question can also not be given without watching the video of the incident completely from all angles.

Why did Andrei and his wife shoot the events on video?

We don't know for sure, we can assume that the family decided to stream (or just shoot) a video of the invasion of the security forces. Similar to that, it was repeatedly done by other Belarusians, to whom they came with a search.

Why do security forces without bulletproof vests go to an apartment of a person "probably involved in terrorism"?

It seems that the interpretation of "working out the addresses of persons probably involved in terrorism" appeared post factum. They have to somehow explain why so many people break into the apartment, but the security forces clearly did not know that the owners had weapons.

The practice of detaining armed persons is completely different - the SOBR usually "entered" through the windows at dawn to such people.

The fact that people were breaking into the apartment without uniforms speaks about the usual routine search, which has already become a strange "norm" in Belarus.

And also that the law enforcement agencies did not have operational information about the weapon, which means they did not "lead" this person.

Although, the fact that Zeltser had a gun could be understood at least because of the analysis of his social networks: he published a photo of a gun.

They had either not checked or, alternatively, believed that the gun was located at the place of registration of the man in the Pershamaiski district.

At least one of the shooters - an unknown enforcer in the gray sweater - took out his weapon only when he heard the shots. And he started shooting when his colleague was in the line of fire. One can argue about the professionalism of such actions in a real acute situation.

The most important question

At the end of the day, we have the most important question: what was it in this situation that it cost two lives at once? And who is really to blame for the fact that it happened?

The situation that has occurred looks like the result of the unwinding of a spiral of violence, repression, impunity, and the radicalization of society: from Taraikouski's hand up - Bandarenka's "leave me alone" - Latypau's pen in his throat - to Zeltser's gun.