Case “Cekici”, wife of the deceased says she is convinced that the accused had killed her husband for money

This guy has a myth, he has a myth, Gzim Retcocer himself has a myth, Gzimi has called him and he has a myth, and he himself knows what he has ba”, has declared damaged at Friday's Constitutional Court in Pristina, reports the “Betim for Justice”.

Retkocer is being charged that on April 29, 2009, he and an unknown person had been kidnapped by the late man Naim Hajriz, deprived of life, hit by hard tools on his head, bound his legs and hands, and then burned his body with the intention of hiding his tracks.

Wounded Hajrizi, responding to special prosecutor Fikrije Fejzullahu's questions, has said it remains close to statements he had given to the police, the prosecutor, and during the past trial review.

According to her, the day before the assassination, the late man Naim Hajriz had left home about 5 o'clock, after the phone call from the accused Retkocer, and he had more than 6,000 euros with him.

I remember that at five o'clock he left the house after he called Joy on the phone and I heard when he told them a Golf 5 came to the garage, take the money and come. Naim took the money and left, but he didn't come back even though he said he was coming back. We've tried several times over the phone to get it but it hasn't been called”, said damaged.

She felt that her husband had talked to the accused several times before this day.

She said that after the deceased had not returned home, they were beginning to worry about her, while tomorrow she said that her brother-in-law, Halim Hajriz, along with her son Arlinda, and her son, Arlinda, had gone to the interview of accused Retkozer to ask for the deceased.

But according to her, after having received no information about the whereabouts of the deceased, her brother-in-law, Halim Hajriz, told her that until she had gone to the police station in Lipjan to announce the case, she had called the accused's uncle on the phone and told him that if she wanted to get Naim, she had to send the money because he was in Skopje.

Asked by her representative, lawyer Berat Tmava, whether she remembered how her husband had been killed, injured, said that for the first time, he had seen his body when it was brought home.

On May 1, 2009, we learned he was killed, I saw the corpse when they brought him home, you didn't have what you saw, but I knew his body even though it was burning”, was answered with tears in its eyes.

According to her, even during the funeral ceremony, her brother - in - law Halim had telephoned the accused Retkocer and his uncle and had been joking.

Even during Nam's range, my brother Halimi called out to Gizim and his uncle, and they've told you they've brought money, and come get Naini that he's in Skopje, or we're buried, and we're on his foot-to-the-room, he said, damaged.

During the same time as she was bearing witness, her son has reacted, the injured Kastriot Hajrizi, reports “Justice Trust”.

“You're playing with my baby blood, I tell you that -- referring to Kosovo lawyer Kelmendi -- comes out of session”, has reacted to the revolted rebel who was taken out of the police hearing.

In the question of the accused Retkocer, whether he and his honor had any conflicts, the damaged has stated that her husband had never told her about any conflict between them.

The injured showed that a few days earlier from the critical day, the late man had come out with the accused and had not returned until evening, while after returning, he had told her that the accused had sent him to a place in Suhareka in the mountains.

And he told me that Gzim was sending me where he remained sorra, somewhere in the mountains, then he came out with Gum tomorrow, and 29 of them were called "Gzimi <x1..." and he said, "It's damaged."

After having damaged her claim that the accused Retkocer had deprived her husband of life only for money, Judge Vesel Ismaili asked the accused's material condition.

“18 years I've been married to Naim, the homes of the Gzim family are 2-3 houses in the middle, we've known them as a family, and materially they haven't been bad, but all the wealth that they've done to their people”, said damaged.

Contrary to Friday's session was the brother of the late Hajrizi, Halim Hajrizi, reports “Justice Trust”.

He said that when he had been looking for his brother who had not been notified and had reported the case to the police, a person had called him and told him that the deceased was in Skopje.

I'm looking for my brother, I went to the Lipjan police station that didn't come back from yesterday, while the cops were getting the notes, I took a phone call on my phone, told me if you're Naini's brother, I told him yes, he told me that Naim is in Skopje, and he told me that you didn't try to call me that we called you, and I got it.

According to him, even after a few hours, the same person had called again and had told him to take the money with him and go and get the deceased Hajriz.

After 2-3 hours, he called me back around 8:00 p.m. again, the same person as the one who called me the first time, told me to put the song down and come and get Naim, the cops told me that you can't go without an escort, and it hasn't worked out that person's number”, the victim said.

In the question of the defendant Retkocer's defense, Kosovar lawyer Kelmendi, why for 12 years in all previous statements the injured had not mentioned that the person had told him to take money with him, the injured man said perhaps he had not remembered that detail before.

I'm talking as they are, maybe she's got to remember, but the truth is what I'm saying today”, he answered.

In the question of Judge Vesel Ismaili, why he was convinced that Retcocer had killed his brother, the injured man said that because of the money, he was convinced that his brother had been killed.

I'm convinced he killed her just to get that money he had on the critical night, got his back fixed up all the articles before my brother. Naim the night she was drowned had 5750 euros”, the injured Hajrizi said in the end.

Otherwise, the session will continue with police official Zymer Gashi's statement.

Retkocer is charged with being denied life on April 29, 2009, along with an unknown person with the nickname “Qeli”, now deprived of life of the late Naim Hajriz, so that after the kidnapping the deceased had been hit with strong tools on his head, binding his legs and hands, and then burned his body with the intention of concealing his tracks.

In this case, charged with serious murder in co-ordination was Osman Spahiu, but following the resumption of the indictment in the final case of the past court review by prosecutor Fikrije Fejzullahu, Spahiu was charged with helping him perform this criminal act, for which he had pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Meanwhile, Retkocer was sentenced to prison for 30 years.

The indictment in this case was announced by the Constitutional Court in Pristina on January 21, 2020, but that against this act it had been filed complaints by defence and prosecution.

Regarding these complaints, Appeals ' college had held the session on July 15, 2020. After reviewing the complaints, the college, consisting of judges Tonka Berishaaj, Driton Muharremi and Vaton Durguti, has decided to approve as based on the complaint of the defendant's defense Retkoceri, Kosovo lawyer Kelmendi, while the prosecution and the damaged party complaints have deemed them unhurt for now.

The Supreme Court of Appeals has examined the first degree act, the defendant's defense complaint, as well as the subject papers, and estimates that the first degree act in this case is again involved with essential violations of the penal procedure's provisions, as well as the error and incomplete confirmation of the actual situation” stated in the Apel's act.

According to Apel's judgment, since this subject had once again become a first - degree retrial, the latter, according to Apel, had largely ignored instructions given by the second - degree court.

According to Apel's assessment, the first degree has provided no reason for the crucial facts, following the contradiction between the device and the bias as a result of not reasoning each evidence separately and not connecting them to each other to an actual, complete state.

According to Appeals, the first scale did not analyze and assess the evidence as the only proof of what it proves and all related evidence to each other what a actual state of affairs proves. In addition, according to the Appeals Act, the first instance has not specified the incriminating actions of each accused in relation to the execution of the assassination.

As stated in the Appeals Act, no reason has been given in the act of first degree where the blood stains of which the DNA profile was made and which resulted in their now belonging to the late Naim Hajrizi. Then, the question of finding the wooden chaff has not been clarified, and the hammer issue has not been clarified about how the same was achieved in court and what is the importance of the same in this criminal case.

These guidelines of the Court of Appeals, though mandatory for the first degree court, have been ignored, and the same have been observed in the other court's act of judgment, which is now the object of the evaluation by the college of this court”, is said in the Apel's act.

In the end, Appeals points out that the first-degree court has the freedom of action about the assessment of evidence, while the Appeals Court only makes reassessing evidence and if it finds mistakes, only in extraordinary cases does the management of evidence with the opening of the second-degree review. In the concrete case, Apel emphasises that he found that the actual description was not done properly in the indictment and that the reasoning is insufficient.

Otherwise, the case had become a retrial by the Court of Appeals on May 4, 2016. Appeals had cancelled the act of the Constitutional Court in Pristina, which on July 7, 2015, the two accused of killing Naim Hajriz, Gezim Retkoceri and Osman Spahiu had sentenced them to 30 years in prison.

In the case of a return to the retrial, the Court of Appeals had concluded that the Constitutional Court in Pristina had violated criminal procedure provisions and that the device of the court had not been drafted as envisioned with the Criminal Procedure Code.

The Constitutional Prosecutor in Pristina, Retkocerin, is accusing him that on April 29, 2009, in order for the vet to bring rich benefits, along with an unknown person with the nickname “Kecel”, had now kidnapped the deceased Naim Hajrizi in order to deprive him of life.

According to the indictment, the late Hajriz had now been hit with strong tools on his head, holding his legs and hands, had now killed the deceased, then sent him to a location between the village of Smallusa and Dobrat, and had buried his remains.