2.Rayonniyat prosecutor is motivated ruling with false information, namely that Muletarov hoarding

Here we should point out that you are in the blog of Lubomir Muletarov hoarding "incurably insane" certificated, just like that, "free" by Ruslan Terziiski prosecutor M German.
As you understand, care of the Sofia Prosecutor's Office and the Interior Ministry were not enough and I've hit a dead end, despite the "posthumous" Make me a custom psychiatric expertise. Such an examination is done only on dead people! The presence of such a test is proof that I died.
This is not true! Replace the word respect, the word "contempt". By Sofia District Prosecutor to the District Court SOFIA G A L B A Lyubomir Dimitrov Muletarov, address: Zona B 18, bl. 1, Sofia 1309 by Attorney. Mincho Spassov, address: Sofia, Pernik St 114 office 6a GSM 0888406004SRESHTU: the decision to discontinue the criminal proceedings in pre-trial proceedings 2164/2010 g.po inventory of 03 Regional Police, pr.pr. 59058/2008 г.
Within and pursuant to Art. 243, para. 3 CCP appeal received by me on 07.03.2012 decree SRS in pr.pr. 59058/2008 г. SRS ceased production, assuming that the charge of making a false expert opinion has not been proven.
In my capacity as a victim, prosecutors appeal this decision because an incorrect legal classification of the acts referred to in the signal and therefore the partial reading of the evidence. hoarding Do objection of prosecutor grams, which in a number of events acts personally negative attitude towards me as a victim, depriving me of procedural rights on the one hand and on the other prominent "protective bias" towards perpetrators officers or experts of the Ministry. An example of such illegal and biased behavior of the prosecutor grams are his actions relating to the present etc. etc. 654/2009, at the SRS against expert Ruslan Terziiski. They were repealed by Decree of 15.12.2011 of the Sofia Appellate Prosecutor in Case 4642/2011 hoarding SAP and it was correctly recognized procedural standing for victims of multiple crime. There are two crimes - one against justice (art. 291 par. 1 NK drawing hoarding a false conclusion about the mental health of the citizen) and the second - against the person (Article 142 and paragraph. 5 NK custom complicity hoarding in illegal restraint freedom by voluntary placement or retention of a healthy person in a health care facility for the mentally ill.) subject to malfeasance of art. 387 of the Penal Code. Appeal this ruling to terminate the criminal proceedings against Tzvetoslava Galabova as unreasonable, inconsistent with the facts and their legal classification as unlawful. hoarding
1.with process "expertise" of VL Pigeon hoarding were rescued from criminal liability officers engaged in illegal hoarding police violence - a crime under Art. 387 par. 1 CC. So she was "saved" from criminal liability ulichenie Interior Ministry officials - personally stolen goods under Art. 294 CC. The main witness-victim Muletarov was declared insane and was removed from any involvement in the process, including testifying for the offense. The investigator-Cap. Christ appointed expert Galabova to determine the suitability of Muletarov to participate in criminal proceedings - ie to testify against police-bullies. It is unacceptable that procedural method to be used for removal of witnesses. No obstacle insane and even children are witnesses, as their testimony was judged according to other evidence in the case. "Physical examination" of Muletarov in order to exclude him as a witness is flawed. Subject to prior production hoarding XVI-P-9/2005 g.SVOP is not illegal behavior of Muletarov and employees of the Interior Ministry. Removal of the victim from testifying against abusers is concealing their crime and objectives freeing them from responsibility. All subsequent investigations were adamant hoarding that Muletarov is healthy and able to participate in criminal proceedings including a full witness.
2.Rayonniyat prosecutor is motivated ruling with false information, namely that Muletarov hoarding refused to attend the review. Muletarov always do it-even evoked the course of several hoarding investigations. If he had refused appearing before the judicial expert on disposal of the investigator in the case would have data for fining him for such behavior. And it does not. On page 2 of the contested decree prosecutor confirmed false "witness Lubomir hoarding Muletarov refused to attend a medical examination before these experts." This fact is false. On 08.10.2010 Lubomir Muletarov appeared personally review to three experts hoarding in building ODPZSS - Sofia city, accompanied by his wife Emilia Muletarov and daughter Veneta Muletarov hoarding and lawyers Alexi Dimitrov, a fact that might be confirmed by these three witnesses . The file is available documentary evidence - Applications