CAT/C/48/D/433/2010 7.8 The medical personnel of the Kostanai City hospital were also questioned and stated that, at the end of March 2007, the complainant was taken to the hospital by ambulance, where he was diagnosed with a cerebral contusion and bruises to the lumbar region, which he claimed he had sustained at the hands of police. The forensic medical examination attested the following injuries: brain contusion, facial abrasions, contused wound on the right supraorbital ridge, contusion of the right kidney and bruises on the body. 7.9 According to the medical records made available to DCECC, the complainant has been under psychiatric supervision since 1978 with the diagnosis of mild mental retardation. On 8 August 2007, in view of the acute reaction of the complainant to stress, his diagnosis was complemented with reactive psychosis and depressive-paranoid syndrome. Based on this, a forensic psychiatric evaluation was ordered on 8 January 2011. 7.10 On 14 January 2011, the complainant requested postponement of investigative actions due to health reasons, which request was denied pending the conduct of the forensic psychiatric examination which, inter alia, was called upon to evaluate if he was fit for participation in investigative actions. 7.11 On 18 January 2011, the psychiatric examination concluded that the complainant presented signs of short-term depressive reactions and was fit to participate in investigative actions. The complainant and his legal representative were acquainted with the findings and contested them, without however indicating the grounds. 7.12 The complainant was summoned to testify nine times between 19 December 2010 and 6 February 2011. No pressure was exerted on the complainant and his family. On 19 January 2011, the complainant declined, in writing, the State party's offer for measures of protection because of absence of threats. 7.13 On 3 February 2011, the complainant filed a written statement refusing the services of his lawyer.14 On 5 February 2011 the Prosecutor of the Kostanai Region received the complainant’s written declaration, dated 3 February 2011, by which he had retracted his previous statements since he had a nervous breakdown when testifying and refused to testify because of the amount of time that had passed since the events.15 On 6 February 2011, the complainant was interrogated about the circumstances in which he wrote the respective letter, and he stated that it was written by him without any external pressure. He refused to testify further because he could not remember the circumstances of the case and he had no claims against the police.16 7.14 On 6 February 2011, the Assistant Prosecutor for Kostanai Region closed the criminal case for lack of evidence. The decision is well-founded because of the complainant’s contradictory and inconsistent statements given in the course of the investigation, the written refusals of his wife and stepsons to testify, 17 the complainant’s retraction of his testimonies and refusal to testify further and the forensic psychiatric examination’s findings of 18 January 2011. 7.15 The State party argues that it was impossible to prove the guilt of police officers because of the length of time (three years and eight months) that has passed since the infliction of bodily injuries, the complainant’s contradictory statements and the subsequent retraction of those statements, the refusal of the complainant’s wife and his stepsons to testify and the denial of torture allegations by police officers. 14 15 16 17 10 Copy available on file. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.