In a change of opinion that has outraged family of victims of last March 1 violence, a report by Russian ballistics experts now says it is not possible to determine specific “Cheryomukha 7” guns that caused the deaths of three civilians in clashes with police.

Forensic investigation revealed that Tigran Khachatryan, Armen Farmanyan and Gor Kloyan were killed by high-powered riot guns used by police. The rifles fire gas grenades that explode on impact and are not intended for lethal force but are extremely deadly if misused -- as it appears in the case of the March 1 victims. Former President Robert Kocharyan said last March that because the weapons in the Armenian police arsenal had been on hand since before independence (1991), they malfunctioned, leading to the deaths.

The three deaths have been the focus of investigation, as they conclusively were determined to have been caused by weapons carried by police on March 1. Experts say the deaths resulted from mis-use of the weapons. Family members say that the three were shot directly and deliberately by a weapon that was meant to be fired for crowd control.

In November, Armenian investigators said it was impossible to link bullet fragments to specific weapons. Initially, Russian experts said that it was possible.

The Prosecutor’s Office solicited information from the manufacturer of the ammunition and later turned to experts at Russia’s Ministry of Internal affairs, who said that each bullet should be traceable to the specific gun from which it was fired and, thus, each officer held to account for whether he properly engaged deadly force. The March 1 investigation has also found that only four officers were using the guns in question.

On February 13, however, the Russian experts reported that “traces found on the presented bullets are not suited for identification,” leading to charges that a “deal” had been struck between Russian and Armenian authorities.

“This is cynicism by which they mock not only the whole nation but also our dead sons,” says Allah Hovhannisyan, mother of Khachatryan.

Since July, the Prosecutor’s Office has said it has appealed to various international organizations (UN, OSCE, US Ambassador to Armenia) to provide them with experts in order to find out who fired the shots which the former president referred to as “special techniques”.

In December the NA Temporary Committee on the March 1 events sent a letter to the Russian Federation Ministry of Internal Affairs to find information about the characteristics of the bullets of Cheryomukha 7 gas grenades. During the same period, a day later, the Prosecutor sent a letter, having a similar content; however the Committee did not get an answer. The Prosecutor, however, heard directly from Moscow and it was this turn of events that led oppositionists including MP Aram Karapetyan, Head of New Times political party see a cover-up conspiracy.

“The problem is that during that period representatives of the police and, as far as I know, even representatives from the President’s staff, arrived in Moscow, in order to implement the ‘traditional methods’ and get the answer they need, so that the revelation is failed,” says Karapetyan, alleging that “traditional methods” mean deceit.

Due to the answer submitted by the Research Institute of Special Technique and Communication specialized in the production of Cheryomukha 7 gas bullets, Armenia obtained the ammunition before 1990. The experts say the bullets have a “shelf life” of five years, and should not be fired if they have been stored any longer.

In a March 20 press conference President Kocharyan said: “We inherited those special techniques from the Soviet period; and the events proved that what we had is rather old, and they are not always safe. We would have three victims less if those special techniques were, in fact, safer.”

The Russian experts, though, reported that even if the bullets were expired, they should not be fatal unless shot directly at someone (rather than into the air as is standard for teargas crowd control).

Based on this argument, members of the Parliamentary Committee maintain that the reason for the deaths is that the weapons were wielded in violation of their purpose.

“The problem is that the three youngsters died not of gas, but because they were shot directly to their heads, that is, they were executed,” Karapetyan told ArmeniaNow adding that “if they wanted to figure out who the murderers were, they would have done it long ago.”

According to their own report, police fired into the air. However, autopsies showed that two of the men were shot in the head and another in the hip.

Victim Tigran Khachatryan’s mother says that it is mentioned in the forensic medicine conclusion that the bullet cut into his body “by high kinetic power”.

“Specialists explained to me that a bullet cuts into a body by high kinetic power when it is shot from a short distance and directly towards a person. It means that the possibility of ricochet is excluded. So my son was directly shot,” Allah Hovhannisyan told ArmeniaNow.

The victims’ families also question why ballistic experts were consulted only in December, when the bullets were recovered in March.

“Preliminary examination was being carried out before, registration books (containing information on which officers were assigned which weapons), were being studied, people were being questioned,” answers Vahagn Haroutounyan, Chairman of the NA March 1 Temporary Commission and Head of the Special Investigative Service.

Former Minister of Internal Affairs, former Yerevan mayor Suren Abrahamyan says that it is within the framework of accepted demands to consult experts so late.

“However, that is not the problem,” says Haroutounyan who has 25 years experience in investigation. “This expertise is only one way out of ten to find out the killers. If there were a wish, it would be possible to settle the issue during several days,” He insists that in this case the shooting police officers are the least guilty. Those who ordered them to shoot must be held to answer.

“The one who is the most responsible for what happened is the one who issued an order. An officer did not have the right to use a weapon independently.”

Republic of Armenia Ombudsman Armen Harutyunyan is among those dissatisfied with the latest conclusions:

“I do not trust these expert examinations,” the public defender says. “I do not believe that there are four people (police officers, who were assigned the weapons), and there are three people killed, and it is not possible to find out who is guilty.”