As I have already written several times, in order for an instrument search enthusiast to be brought to administrative responsibility, this citizen must really want it very much. For example, deliberately going to dig in the protected zones of an archaeological site or cultural heritage site. Or, what happens much more often, post rare finds with signs of an archaeological object on VK with page verification using a personal mobile phone number.
This is a simple matter, however, the principle of our judicial system is that the severity of the punishment must correspond to the degree of public danger of the criminal act. Which is why 99% of administrative cases against diggers end in a sentence – a fine of 2,000 rubles without confiscation of the metal detector.
And yet, there are criminal cases and there are many of them. Of course, not as much as archaeologists would like, however, certain statistics can be carried out. And, if you remove from these statistics real cases involving real black sheep. This is when organized groups dug burial mounds in the Astrakhan region, or two citizens were engaged in excavations in a Greek cemetery in Crimea. Then, based on the analysis of other criminal cases, one can understand that the defendants there tried very hard to turn the administrative case into a criminal one. Or, which also happens, the number of random coincidences has grown into the quality of a criminal event.
These are the matters I propose to look into now.
Example one. There is no need to be rude to archaeologists.
This story took place back in 2014. Then there was already a lot of noise and discussion on the specialized Koparra forums on the topic of the new criminal article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, there were no specific examples yet.
In general, in Tatarstan a group of archaeologists (legal archaeologists) worked at the Malopolyansky settlement in the Chistopol region. The dating of the fort is 10-13th century. In general, archaeologists somehow gathered in the city on business and at the same time stopped at the store. They drive along the road and see that two kilometers from the settlement there are two jeeps standing by the road, and eight people with metal detectors and shovels are walking along a plowed field. The scientists stopped and politely asked the diggers to stop their illegal activities. To which we heard a refusal and a statement in response, something like: “We know the law, we don’t violate anything, we even have a lawyer, would you like him to explain everything to you?”
The archaeologists did not listen to the lawyer’s arguments and left for Kazan. There we stopped at a store, and at the same time we stopped at the regional FSB office. They were already returning back, accompanied by a task force. As it turned out, the diggers were still in that field, and even at that very moment everyone gathered near the cars to have lunch. This facilitated the operational measures to arrest him. As a result, within five minutes after the arrest, all the defendants, including that same lawyer, wrote a sincere confession and expressed a desire to fully cooperate with the investigation.
Example two. And, there are eyes in the forest.
Many diggers think and believe that if they go far into the forest, then no one will see it there. Oh, well, you can walk around the mounds and, say, clean the old tract with a tractor.
So in 2013, in the Krasnodar Territory, the police detained two citizens who were searching for archaeological objects in the area of the Arba settlement. The settlement was located in a forest on the outskirts of Udobnaya station. Information about the presence of black diggers in the area of the ancient settlement was reported to the police by a local forester who was passing by and noticed a car and people with metal detectors and shovels. As a result, after detaining and searching the car, archaeological objects were found in the possession of the diggers. Subsequently, the court sentenced one of the detainees to confiscation of the MD and a year of imprisonment with a suspended sentence.
As another example that the forest and remoteness will not guarantee anonymity, we can cite a case that took place in the Kostroma region. There, in 2018, one citizen was convicted of excavating a tract, a 19th-century settlement, using earth-moving equipment.
A citizen arrived at the tract and saw that he was no longer the first, nor the second, nor the twentieth. And then the citizen came up with an idea: “Why not order a tractor with a blade from a local resident?” So let’s clear the top layer of the tract and start walking in a new way. Planned, done.
A month later, fellow investigators knocked on the door of this citizen’s apartment. And there they explained to him that a criminal case had been opened against him. And, they identified this citizen by the license plates of the car in which he and his friends went to dig this tract. As it turned out later at the trial, the numbers were established from the frames of the photo of the trap that rangers and game guards are now installing everywhere at the entrances to forest areas to suppress the activities of poachers.
Result: 150,000 rubles fine and confiscation of the metal detector with a shovel. It is noteworthy that the investigation did not look for accomplices in the excavations or the owner of the tractor.
Example three. Curiosity and stupidity.
With all the abundance of examples of how people themselves are looking for an additional chapter to their biography in the form of a criminal sentence, I also have favorite examples. And this is one of them.
So in February 2020, in the newspaper of free advertisements “Zarinskaya Advertising” (Altai Territory), who would have thought, a free advertisement with a photo was published. The photograph showed a forged bit, two arrowheads and an unknown piece of iron. The author of the ad asked readers to help identify the items he found.
Employees of the local history museum saw this advertisement in the newspaper and contacted the FSB with a request to conduct an investigation. It didn’t take long to look for the author of the free ad, since he sent the text of the ad and photographs from his smartphone to the newspaper’s general chat on WhatsApp.
After a conversation with the investigator, the citizen confessed, especially since for this offense under the Civil Code he only faced a fine of 2,000 rubles. The digger also showed where the objects were found. And then, after checking, it turned out that the very mound where the citizen dug up the objects is an object of archaeological heritage identified since 2012. Mound. As a result, the administrative article was immediately replaced with a criminal one.
As a result: a court verdict under a criminal article, confiscation of the metal detector and a fine of 10,000 rubles.
That's how stories happen. If you liked the article or have any questions, write in the comments, we will definitely discuss everything.