[ad_1]
The Belgrade Court of Appeal overturned the first instance verdict in the murder case of the owner and journalist of “Dnevni Telegraf”, Slavko Ćuruvija, with the explanation that the first instance court overreached the prosecution by presenting non-persons identified in that case.
According to the overturned verdict, Ćuruvija was killed by an unidentified person, and DB members prepared a “field” for that. At the same time, the Court of Appeal ordered the defendants to be tried again before the Special Court in Belgrade.
As published on the website of the Court of Appeals, the first instance verdict is challenged for significant infringement of the provisions of the criminal procedure, indicating that the first instance court violated the objective and subjective identity of the indictment and exceeded the imputation, thus committing significant violations of the criminal procedural provisions, for being the incomprehensible verdict. as well as that the verdict does not state the reasons for the facts that are the object of evidence, and the reasons provided are completely confusing and significantly contradictory, so it is not possible to examine the legality and regularity of the verdict.
As indicated, in the specific case, the plaintiff maintained the factual description from the indictment until the end of the main trial, and subsequently the court of first instance modified the factual description of the accusation by adding certain facts and circumstances to the factual description of the verdict first instance. they were contained in the indictment.
In this way, in addition, the Court of Appeals determined, the defendants were found guilty of new facts and actions, which the prosecution does not contain and on which, during the process, no evidence was presented.
That is, by introducing unidentified persons in the operative part of the verdict who, according to the court of first instance, participated in the commission of the crime together with the defendants as direct perpetrators and adding new actions to the defendants Radonjić , Kurak and Romić, the court of first instance on how to commit the crime, significantly modified the factual situation that it established in its own judgment, in relation to the factual situation described in the indictment, while the appeal verdict did not provides any evidence on which the court of first instance establishes with undoubted certainty the presence of another person in the place, the direct author, or on the basis of which evidence established that the unidentified person reached an agreement on the deprivation of life of the victim, and which is reasonably indicated by the appeal of the Prosecutor’s Office against Organized Crime. At the same time, by introducing unidentified persons in the factual description of the crime, in several places and, in different sections, the pronouncement of the verdict was made incomprehensible, since at first it is not clear whether in this particular case it is a question of an unidentified person or several unidentified persons, if the same unidentified is the principal, the person with whom the defendants reach a preliminary agreement. , and also the direct perpetrator of the criminal act, or it is different unidentified persons ”, it is written on the website of the Court of Appeals.
Likewise, adds the Court of Appeals, the court of first instance did not state in the ruling, and later in the reasoning for the verdict, how Kurak and Romić allowed the unidentified person to commit this crime, which makes their actions unclear. and incomprehensible.
“Therefore, it is not clear from the operative part of the first instance verdict and it is not clear where Romić and Kurak were at the time of the commission of the criminal offense against the injured parties, whether they were together or separated, not yet it is clear in what way and why with their actions they allowed an unidentified person to commit a crime and thus, as co-authors, they participated in the commission of this crime ”, it is stated.
The Court of Appeals, among other things, concludes that the appeals are based on the fact that the reasoning of the verdict did not provide sufficiently clear reasons for the decisive facts from which the court of first instance determined the existence of a prior agreement between all the parties. accused, especially the unidentified.
“In support of the fact that a significant violation of the provisions of the criminal procedure was committed, and that there are no reasons for determining facts, the court of first instance does not give reasons for the joint intention of the accused, nor agreements, nor allegations of which concludes that the defendants are Radonjic ”. Kurak and Romić acted as executors, “writes the Court of Appeals.
For participating in the murder of Curuvija, which occurred on April 11, 1999, to a total of 100 years in prison Radomir Markovic, the then head of the State Security Department, Milan Radonjic, the then head of the DB center in Belgrade, as well as Miroslav Kurak, a member of the DB reserve force, and Ratko Romic, a DB operative, were sentenced.
[ad_2]
