Instead of the "madness," they were placed under the care of their mother.

      Additionally, by reclassifying the "serious charge" to "medium severity," the appeal freed the 16-year-old schoolboy from paying a fine of 10,000 rubles. The director of the Verkhoshizhem school, who laughed and told the crying mother kneeling before her, "Let him lie down, maybe it will help him," surely knows what a "closed-type institution" is, where the Soviet District Court "blessed" the boy until he reaches the age of 18. Moreover, the word "lie down" clearly does not refer to a euphemism, as it directly explains the methods and ways—most likely, mostly medicinal—that the "educational process" regarding Roman will take place in the "closed-type special institution." As the teenager's mother, Lyudmila, explained, she filed a lawsuit in the Pervomaisky Court, naming the "Bureau of Forensic Medical Examination" as defendants, which determined that the schoolboy was "dangerous to himself and others." She also included the school, which characterized the student not just negatively, but in an exaggeratedly negative light. As stated in the appellate instance, the claim that "Oparin skipped" only indicated that he was late for class. The "firm conviction" of the teaching staff (for example, the class teacher, who has neither pedagogical nor any higher education) that the teenager "curses at teachers" turned out to be a boys' quarrel, which was proven. The Regional Court also took into account other characteristics of the teenager: he is kind and attentive to others' problems—he volunteers, is an athlete—regularly attends training and competes, socially adapted and empathetic—during the holidays, he works at a sawmill to help his family financially, where a second child has been born. Recall that according to the materials of the criminal case, last autumn, a group of six Verkhoshizhem teenagers held parties in an empty apartment in one of the houses on Pervomaiskaya Street in the village of Verkhoshizhemye. The boys listened to music and danced. Neighbors, noticing the noise, reported it to the apartment owner, who, upon returning home, found a broken lock, signs of strangers, and the disappearance of an old Husqvarna chainsaw stored on the porch. Later, a commodity expert assessed its value at four thousand rubles. The teenagers were quickly identified, and they did not deny that Roman took the saw, but not for selfish reasons, rather "out of curiosity": he disassembled it to see how it was arranged inside. He threw the parts out onto the street. The parents, apologizing for their son, compensated the owner for the damage caused. The police, emphasizing "illegal entry into a dwelling," initiated a criminal case under the "serious charge," forwarding it to the Investigative Committee. At the same time, the investigation, diligently ignoring the fact of "collective entry" (Article 139 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Violation of the inviolability of the home"), granted the other teenagers the status of "witnesses" (they were not even placed on school records), while the ninth-grader Roman was charged with a "serious composition." The appellate court disagreed with this, reclassifying the charge to "medium severity," taking into account that there was no break-in, and the teenagers had been "freely visiting" the foreign apartment for a month and a half. The court separated the materials with a list of other witnesses who also regularly visited the foreign home into a separate proceeding. Moreover, the investigation established the name of the teenager who broke the door lock and invited friends to the empty apartment.