6 minutes agoFrom life in prison, the Supreme will reduce the sentence of the accused for his brother's murder to 35 years
Periskopi(2 years ago)
(2 years ago)Pristina-The Supreme Court has changed the verdict that was sentenced to life imprisonment by Gani Krezi, for killing his brother and burning his corpse. Third grade, it now reduced the sentence to 35 years in prison for accused Krezi. Krezi was charged that in February 2020, in the village of Brnjak [...]
Kriezi was charged that, in February 2020, in the village of Brnjak in Rahovec, he deliberately deprived his brother of life, now the late B.K, and then burned his body, reports the “Bettim for Justice”.
Initially, the Constitutional Court in Gjakova on February 8, 2023, had sentenced Kriez to life imprisonment. The Court of Appeals had confirmed that decision. The Supreme Court, on October 19, 2023, had also refused to hold back the defendant's complaint against the Court of Foundation and Appeals' bias, ending his life sentence.
But the accused has exploited the right to demand for protection of legitimacy against the Supreme decision, since he has not been satisfied with his stated decision.
The Supreme decision states that the demand for protection of legitimacy is partly based, stressing that eternal imprisonment is pronounced when the work is carried out under very serious circumstances.
In the concrete case, according to the Supreme Court's assessment, the circumstances must be even more serious, more serious- “particularly serious” to separate the case from others with the same legal qualifications and to justify the pronunciation of the most severe punishment.
“The arrival of convicts in the victim's house and his preliminary speech with him, as well as the fact that you deprive the family member of life (his brother) and then try to hide traces by burning the corpse, the sudden act of firing from the gun to now the deceased at the moment when he didn't expect it, when he spoke on the phone and faked it on the couch, shows that the work was committed to the family member, who is distinguished from the criminal act of murder by 172 of the KKP, whose execution is reported in the Supreme Court's decision.
Always according to the Supreme One, in this case the result is man's death, so it's a serious consequence. However, the court's agreement cannot be approved that the extent of the damage caused has serious consequences for the family and reasons for the stated sentence.
“Cause of the family member's death, in this case by capital murder by Article 173, par.1, points 1.3. The KPRK could not be named as “pass too heavy” in the sense of Article 41 of KPRK because the word “times” implies an even greater evil. While the law does not define the meaning of the strong “judicial practice has shown that with this it must be understood that, for example, there is a combination of the quantifiable elements of the criminal work of serious murder, such as killing the mother in a cruel way and risking life or even deprivation from life and of her baby, the prolonged and severe torture of the victim and causing death in unbearable pain, which usually exceeds the pain of death, burial, or burning of the living person, and similar situation<7> is explained in the decision.
Reasoning on the Supreme Court's decision, it is said that the penalty - measuring foundation had found, not extenuating circumstances, but grave circumstances that the accused had committed with the most serious form of guilt, with direct intent and with a high degree of will and intentional determination.
The founder had appreciated the low motive that the accused because of property problems takes the victim home and then in the evening to hide the traces burns the body of the deceased. The first rate is also said to have taken on the basis of the age of a relatively old person, the high degree of damage inflicted on the family, and that the same was the penalty for a life sentence by the Criminal Court of Cassation in L.Z.
“Although the court of the first instance mentioned above, it has explicitly not been described as particularly important circumstances but only assessed them, they have not been able to have such an impact on the pronunciation of the sentence of life in prison, because the fact that the victim and convicts have had property problems or “that it refers to the first instance court can not be a difficult circumstance, but eventually, the quasi-curative element of the criminal work”, has estimated the Supreme Authority.
For these reasons, the Supreme Court has found that in the actual case, conditions for publishing a life sentence have not been met, so Krezius sentenced him to 35 years in prison.
“This case does not specify specific sentences for this criminal offence and for criminal possession, control or unauthorized possession by Article 366 pars. 1 of KPRK, which was carried out in the union, because it decided that the height of the prison sentence for the first criminal work should be prison terms of 35 years”, is said in the argument.
It emphasises that this sentence is the maximum and the unique sentence cannot pass the 35-year period.
The Supreme Court found that there are grave circumstances on the side of the convicts that were assessed by the courts of the lowest institutions, in addition to those with this act of judgment that were eliminated as such and found no circumstances like these that had argued the pronunciation of the mildest sentence, either under the legal maximum of this kind of punishment, but that the same is necessary for achieving the”, it is said in the act.
Unlike this decision, the Supreme had decided to investigate the complaint when it had confirmed the sentence of life imprisonment. In the act taken on October 19, 2023, it is determined that the accused himself, in his defense, in the statement given in the police, has not denied the commission of criminal work in the direction of his brother, has instead described in detail how he now deprived the deceased B.K. of life, then how he burned the corpse and threw the same amount in order to hide the murder traces.
In addition, witnesses from the family of the convicted and witnesses of the now deceased's family have confirmed that the accused Gani Krezi is the one who now deprived the deceased B of life, so that the court's conclusions of the first degree that the accused deliberately deprived the deceased of life were right and reasonable and based on other test and paperwork.
“This court, taking into account the manner of committing criminal acts, the place of committing criminal acts, bringing the accused before committing criminal acts, and following the commission of criminal acts, the fact that the criminal act was committed in “the particularly burdensome danger of criminal responsibility and criminal responsibility, considers that the sentence which the court has pronounced in the first instance, confirmed even in the act of second degree, is fair, legitimate, and that the same is in harmony with the intensity of the social danger of the criminal act and the criminal responsibility committed, and is the function of the individual presidentate, and the sentence will be carried out of the pre-prisonable sentence by the KCPCHCH).
According to the indictment filed by the Constitutional Prosecutor in Gjakova on February 11, 2020, in the village of Brnjak, the Rahovec municipality, right in the home of the late man, with the goal of profiting wealth, accused Gani Krezi, has deliberately deprived his brother, B.K.
The indictment says that the accused had previously known that the brother had a considerable amount of money that he had taken with him from Switzerland's state and on the critical day, Gani Kreez had gone to his home, supposedly to send a total of $7,000 money from the son of the late B. K, A. J-C., on behalf of a debt.
The Actakuz says that during a joint conversation, the accused had been insulted by the deceased on the grounds that he was interfering with his family.
On the other hand, the charge is said to be revolting, the accused returns to his home, pick up his gun, where around 11:00 a.m., he again goes to the deceased man B's home. K, you walk in the house, and in the living room, where the same guy was standing, he hit him with shells in the chest, leaving him dead.
Always according to the indictment, then the accused takes the corpse, dragging it into a blanket, puts it in the backyard, then covers the corpse with various materials, such as wood, plastic, paper bags, boards, black paper, and other things, which are then lit up by creating a large fire, which stands burning 2-3 days and then waste along with some now bone waste of the deceased is said to throw out of the house, in an unidentified place until now, with the intent to eliminate traces of crime.
For this, he was accused of committing criminal work “grave murder” by Article 173, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1.3 and 1.6 of the Criminal Code, which is sentenced to no less than ten years in prison or to life imprisonment.
Confrontation according to the prosecution, the defendant earlier, until February 11th, 2021, without authorisation has possessed weapons and ammunition, contrary to the applicable law regarding weapons in the Republic of Kosovo.
With these actions, the same was charged with having committed criminal work “maintaining ownership, control or unauthorized possession of weapons” by Article 366 paragraph 1 of the Penal Code. This work is fined for up to 7 thousand and 500 euros or to prison for up to five years.
