Stand-by measure set against “Cobra” and five others

According to Judge D.H., left in custody, “due to suspicion based on committing crimes: Major murder A nine 173 parag. One subfront. 1.5, Property, Control, or Unauthorized Weapons Property article 366 par.1, and evidence manipulation from Article 389 par.1 of the Republic of Kosovo Penal Code”.

While, “A.V., B.M., J.B., K.G., and E.A., Because of the doubt based whether in co-ordination committed a crime. Turnout in Beatdown From Article 187 parag. 1, regarding Article 31st Criminal Code of the Republic of Kosovo”.

The court on the case of appointing the detention measure to the defendants has estimated there are legal reasons for the appointment of the detention measure, and from the evidence collected until this stage, comes with suspicion based on:

“Defendant D.H., on January 03th, about 0400 a.m., near his bar “K. C....”, which is on the Prizren Zur practice, with fire weapons, deliberately deprive the victim of life of V.C., risking the life of the injured R.S.R., which injured and endangered the lives of the A.C., that all three citizens of the Republic of Albania, the way that because of a preliminary dispute about paying their bills to the locals, starts fighting between workers at the <x2...C.C.H., the three citizens of the Albanian Republic, the way they were damaged, where they caused damage to the damage to the local disaster, the R.C.R.R.R.R.S.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.A.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.S.R.R.R.S.R.R.S.S.R.R.R.R.S.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.

Defendant D.H., That by January 03rd, 2023, he had a firearm in his possession, so far of the unknown type, which I use by shooting my way up,

Defendant D.H., in the date and time described as the highest, removes his DVnga bar device “K...C... ”, where the dispute of high-ends has begun. in order to prevent the exploitation of records in locals that would serve in criminal procedure.

Defendants A.V., B.M., J.B., K.G., and E.A., On January 03th, about 0400 a.m., in the “bar K...C...

Will these facts be argued, however, in the further stages of criminal procedure.

With the case of the detention assignment, the Court has taken into account the fact that when the defendants are released, they can hide or run on the run with the intention of shamngies of criminal responsibility.

Taking into account the Supreme Court has concluded that the detention assignment at this stage is necessary and reasonable, taking into account the criminal acts imposed on suspects and the serious consequences they have caused, and with the release of the defendants to freedom there is the risk of committing other criminal acts, so this is a sufficient basis for the Court to appoint the detention measures to the indictees”.

Note: Against that decision, the dissatisfied side has the right to complaint, at the Court of Appeals, complaints against this act did not delay his execution.