Prisoners of over 11 years in prison for stealing from which only one “Orbit” sought release or retrial

Their amendments to the Foundation's decision, the accused, have been submitted to the Court of Appeals, which, along with the complaint exercised by the Constitutional Prosecutor in Pristina, were reviewed by an Appeals College, composed by judges Jevdet Abazi, Abdullah Ahmeti and Vaton Dorgi on Friday.

The three indictees are charged with being charged on March 12th and 14th 2018, in the neighbourhood “Calabria” in Pristina, following preliminary planning, sharing roles and co-ordination, with the aim of anti-legal gain and the embezzlement of violent foreign property, have attempted to commit theft, reports “Bettim for Justice”

As described in the indictment, the attempt by the three accused to take something from this bar has only taken one chewing gum.

On this charge, the Constitutional Court in Pristina, on March 5th of this year, accused Bislimi of criminal activity “severe years of imprisonment and 500 euros, and for criminal work “in ownership, control or unauthorized possession of weapons”, with 500 euros in fines.

To him, he was then pronounced a unique sentence of four years and 10 months in prison, as well as 1,500 euros in fines.

Charged Ramqaj and Sahiti, for the serious criminal offence “, had been acquitted of charges in the absence of evidence, while sentenced to three years and six months in prison and 500 euros in fines for the criminal offense.

The conviction pronounced by the accused has also been calculated for the past time in custody and house arrest from April 7th 2018 to March 5, 2018, when even the house arrest measure had ended.

And free from charges of indictee Ramqaj or retrial of the case, her defender, lawyer Faruk Binakaj, demanded from the Apel's college.

According to the defence, the first scale has failed to prove the actual situation in this case, in terms of indictee Ramqaj.

“During the trial review, which was maratonic, I asked the prosecution only a proof confirming the preliminary planning, which is, then says in co-ordination, I hala doesn't know what my client's role was, hala doesn't know, the prosecution has failed to testify to”, attorney Binakaj said in his address to Apel's college.

Binakaj said the first degree has acted justly when it has freed its defense from the criminal offence, but said there is remarks in the prosecution's complaint of this case, where the first <x0-5th century has not issued due sentences with fines and that respond to the degree of responsibility, and that the judgment does not express social judgment”.

According to Binakaj, for the work for which his release and protection has been released has failed to prove its responsibility, while added that it has not been achieved or confirmed whether Ramqaj has been in the role of assistant or chief chief.

The expression “social prejudice”, which the prosecution mentioned in her complaint, Binakaj said it allows a bitter taste because in this case society is not being tried but the person.

As for the damage caused, the lawyer said that in this case the property benefit was only a “Orbit”, which is worth 45 or 50 cents, while for the prosecutor who has filed complaints, the lawyer said he didn't even read the subject, but has just received the complaint as a template.

“First analyze the indictment and then you have to retrial it or release my defense”, finish his word, lawyer Binakaj.

Released from the case's charges or retrials, he has requested from the second instance even the defender of the other indictee in this case, Lilica Sahiti, attorney Asdren Bytyqi, who was not present at the session to ease his complaint.

“Mbes behind my lawyer's words”, Sahiti said briefly in her speech.

Disgusted with the conviction pronounced against his defender, Edison Bislimi, there is also lawyer Nasuf Hasani.

According to Hasan's complaint, the act of first degree is involved with substantial violations of procedural provisions, mistaken confirmation of the actual situation and violation of criminal law.

As noted in his complaint, the accused Bislimi has pleaded guilty, so the sentence has had to be milder, since even criminal acts have remained at an attempt.

All the damage that has been done in this case, according to Hasan, has been a broken glass in one bar and a chewing gum received at the other bar, which the accused Bislim had, in complaint, made drunk.

And the conviction for the criminal crime of heavy theft, in addition to the conviction of the robbery, the prosecution has demanded that Appeals be pronounced to the accused, Ramqaj and Sahiti, who has supported it through one through the parliament, and the Appeals Prosecutor, who has also proposed that the complaints of defenders of the accused be denied.

Otherwise, according to the prosecution, Bislimi, Ramqaj and Sahiti, on March 12th 2018, at around 03:40 in the Kalabria district of Pristina, at the “Euroophone”, following a preliminary planning by sharing roles in co-ordination with the aim of anti-legal gain and the embezzlement of violent foreign property, have attempted to commit theft.

Bislimi, by strong means had broken the main door window and entered the bar to commit theft, but after the alarm had been activated, the same had left and had managed to get nothing, while defendants Joy Ramqaj and Lirika Sahiti had made guards outside the club.

On the basis of the indictment, the three defendants, along with the N person. N, unknown to the prosecution, at the same local location, but two days later, March 14, 2018, about 16:20, after planning their actions in advance, to share their roles, with the aim of illegal profiting and embezzlement of foreign property, so that Ramqaj and Sahiti had gone in, until working there had been damaged Besa Sufaj.

According to the prosecution, Sahiti had threatened him with words and physically attacked the injured by grasping him for hair and hitting him with a barrel of pistols in his head, but damaged had managed to activate the alarm with the defendant's case, except for one chewing gum, had failed to get anything else and had escaped from the scene.

As the prosecution claims, while Sahiti and Ramqaj were inside the bar, he made guards and accused Lilica Sahiti and the N.N. person.

Sahiti, in addition to these two works, was charged with illegal possession, but the weapon used was not known to the prosecutor.

At the November 9th 2018 session, prosecutor Ferdane Sylejmani had made precision in the legal qualifications of criminal acts involved at point 1 and 2 of the indictment device.

At the point 1, where the accused were accused of committing criminal work “severe recovery”, the paragraph 1 under the front of 1.22 adds to Article 28 and 31 of the KPRC. She had made the re-qualification also in terms of point 2 of the indictment device, so that for criminal action “the “migration” adds paragraph 3 to paragraph 1 and regarding KPRK Article 31, removing KPRK's Article 28.

Following this recoupling, accused Edison Bislimi had pleaded guilty to the alleged <x0-year-old gross attempted <x01>, while incriminating criminal acts below point 2 and 3 of the indictment, he has declared he does not feel guilty.

While other indictees, Ramqaj and Lirika Sahiti, had been declared innocent of the criminal acts that were imposed on them. /Betimy for Justice