Thaci and others are accepted on trial for some victims, one mentioned in the indictment

The decision was made on May 29th by the chairman of the court, Charles Smith III, reports the “Justice Trust”, broadcast. Periscope.

While the motion for admission into evidence of documents dealing with victims of the murder, the prosecution submitted it on December 13th, 2024.

After responding to the defense, the prosecution had changed the list of proposed documents on April 7, 2025. The proposed documents were added only to another document that was a collection of documents related to autopsy, DNA analysis and identification of a victim mentioned in the indictment.

According to the document, all victims except one are mentioned in the prosecution's indictment in this case.

The SPS had said the proposed documents confirm the mistreatment or death of some victims, as it says in the indictment. Other documents, however, indicate circumstances or similar causes of the death of victims in the same country.

These evidence, according to the Prosecutor, reinforces evidence of cruel treatment and torture of detainees who have survived in detention centres.

The defence has said these documents cannot be accepted in material evidence, as their provative value is exceeded by the biased effect, as they cannot challenge these documents with witnesses.

“ ... An autopsy report or death-related findings are central evidence in a murder trial and can't be challenged, contrary to the 149 rule; (v) DNA reports and analyses are also evidence of experts and certificates of DNA do not meet the minimum threshold of credibility; (vi) the statements of the UN anthropologists regarding exhumations also constitute evidence of experts, as is recognized by international criminal tribunes, and for this reason should be accepted through witnesses, in accordance with the 149th rule; (vi) United Nations Mission documents in Kosovo <0). And the former Yugoslavia's pre-contacterates the case for the case that calls out against the prosecution, and the investigation is a case that calls for a case against criminal prosecution.

Likewise, the photos the Prosecutor has proposed for evidence among these documents, defence says they are unacceptable as they are not clarified through oral evidence.

The trial subx0> The trial body cannot evaluate the weight of evidence by experts in an abstract way, especially since the evidence has to do with technical issues beyond the body's expertise, and it should therefore be heard by experts and allow the challenge of evidence”, the document, which summarizes the defence response to this motion.

In addition, the prosecution had responded to the defense, saying that the preamble of the latter was completely groundless.

Otherwise, according to the ruling, the documents proposed between 1 and 9 concerned a number of victims for which there are claims in the indictment. Specifically, documents from 1 to 5 were photographs of human remains from exhumation. However, documents 6 and 7 are reports of the victims being identified at their respective locations.

The 8th document, on the other hand, was a report from a <x0-second investigation, mortem” for an exhumation site at a location reportedly important for assessing the circumstances for the victim's death. But the last document in this group was an exhumation report referring to a specific victim.

“in the light of the above and assessing the contents of the proposed specimens, the court is convinced that the proposed 1-9 specimens are important for claims and charges in the indictment”, the decision says.

According to the decision, the above documents hold EULEX logo, and the Office for Missing Persons and Legal Medicine, have dates for each photograph and refer to the name of forensic photos, which meet the principle of authenticity.

In addition, the court says the defense will have the opportunity to address these arguments and challenge their contents during the presentation of evidence in case it does. As a result, these documents were accepted in material evidence.

The proposed test 10 concerns a alleged victim (19.1) and precisely is a report on the investigation of the findings and identification of the mortar remains of this victim. Under the decision, Z The SP has said it received this report from Prizren's Constitutional Court.

For more information, the panel notes that the proposed evidence is important and can support the specific testimony of witnesses, documentary evidence and argued facts the panel has received in court knowledge. In light of the above, the panel is convinced that the proposed test 10 is important for claims and charges in the indictment”, the decision said.

While evidence between 11 and 13 concerns five victims (20.1, 22.2, 22.3, 23.1 and 23.2) and are documents identifying these victims for which the prosecution has said they support certain witness testimony,

“in light of the above, the panel is convinced that the proposed evidence 11-13 is important for claims and charges in the indictment”, the verdict said.

Evidence from 14 to 25 also deals with some victims (victims 18.1 to 18.12).

Test 14 under the verdict consists of an exhumation report, as well as identifies the victims found in this country. However, evidence from 15 to 24 is reports of autopsies of found morto remains that identify victims and determine the cause or circumstances of death. While, evidence 25 is a colorful photograph in which it is the site of exhumation.

The prosecution has requested that documents ranging from 26 to 28. For the latter, the court has found that request is unnecessary because this document is already accepted in material evidence.

And for documents 26 to 27, it involves a victim (17.1) for which the court has said they are important for claims of mistreatment or cause and the circumstances of the death of this alleged victim, as the indictment stipulates.

Similar
The defender of the victims will seek admission into evidence...

2 Ser, 2025, 16:04
Thaci case and others, the defender of the victims will...

2 Car, 2025, 13:18
Partly accepted are some evidence related to the expert...

2 Car, 2025, 11:18
As a result, documents 26 and 27 were accepted in material evidence after it was concluded that they meet the terms of provative value and authenticity.

Documents from 29 to 32 again involve victims (16.1 and 16.2). The first of these is the report on the extraction of two groups of mortor remains from one location. The 30th document, however, is a summary of forensic documents for a victim. In contrast, documents 31 and 32 are photo registers that describe photos taken of morto remains exhumed in specific locations.

Documents 33 to 55 are said to contain information on a number of victims (1.1 to 1.9).

According to the court, proposed documents 46 and 48 to 54 have already been accepted. While, documents from 33 to 45, 47 and 55 are UNMIK documents and forensic documents related to sites and individuals that were accepted in material evidence.

Documents from 56 to 59 relate to the death of a victim named 34.1. For these materials, the court has stated that they are important to some evidence of witnesses, some documentary evidence, and proved facts for which the court has taken judgment.

The trial “Trug notes the presentation of the SPS that the proposed documents are important for some witnesses' testimony, documentary evidence and proved evidence for which the court has taken judicial action”, the verdict said.

The proposed 60th test involves one person and consists of a certificate of his death, which this person has no identity revealed in the document or number as it was in preliminary cases.

In addition to this person's death, this document is said to be related to the circumstances of his alleged prohibition, his conduct at a halt, etc.

According to the ruling, the court has stated that this person is not a victim mentioned by name in the indictment or in its appendix. However, according to them, the evidence of his death in the KLA ban is important to define some models related to the alleged treatment and murder of those detained by the KLA and the cause and cause of the circumstances of the death of some of these detainees. As a result, like the above documents, this court also accepted it in material evidence.

Tests 61 and 62 concern victims “8.1” and “8.2”. The first is a collection of documents from an autopsy and exhumation victim, while the second document is a death certificate and an autopsy report for a victim.

As far as authenticity is concerned, the decision says these documents contain official logos of the former International Tribunal for Yugoslavia and UNMIK. In addition, it is said that the prejudgment effect does not exceed the provative value and therefore were accepted in material evidence.

Proposed documents 64 to 71 concern victims 91.1 to 9.8 and are mainly documents related to the death of victims, autopsy reports, death certificates, exhumation reports, identification, and DNA analysis. Appreciating their authenticity and provative value, the court has recognized them in material evidence.

The proposed test 72 relates to the victim “26.1”, which is a collection of documents related to the exhumation of a specific victim.

However, the evidence proposed from 73 to 76 concerns the victim “13.1x1>. The last document has already been accepted in material evidence, and the prosecution's request for this document has been declared invalid.

“Regarding the survey of proposed evidence 73-75, the panel notes that the SPS claims they are linked to an alleged victim. [File] E REDECT]. The panel notes that the proposed evidence 73-75 consists of documents related to death and the identification of a certain victim. The panel is convinced of the survey of these articles in particular, with claims of mistreatment and/or the cause and circumstances of the death of a alleged victim as set forth in the indictment”, the decision says.

While the latest documents proposed in these motions are from 77 to 90 and concern some victims (10.1 to 10.15).

The proposed “Tests 77-90 are composed of documents related to death and the identification of a particular victim”, the decision said.

While the 63th material was refused to be added to material evidence, according to the court, the prosecution had to include this document on its pretrial test list and showed no convincing reason why it failed to do so.

<x0) E PRANON Moion; (b) E WHICH SPS's request for permission to add the State Material (Proposed test test test test test test test test) (c) I PRANON as evidence proposed test 1-27, 29-62, 64-75 and 77-90, including each translation of them”, the decision said.

Meanwhile, on April 15th 2025, the prosecution has announced that it has completed presenting evidence in the case.

The Specialised Prosecutor's Office, on September 30th 2022, has handed over the confirmed amended indictment against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselini, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi, which consists of ten points on charges, where the latter are charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

On April 29th 2022, the Specialised Prosecutor's Office had handed over a amended indictment to Hashim Thaci, Kadri Wessel, Rexhepi and Jakup Krasniqi, where four indictees have committed war crimes even in Gjilan, Budakov and Semtish.

On November 9th 2020, in their first appearances, Hashim Thaci's Jakup Krasniqi has been declared innocent of the charges placed on them. Wessel has also been declared in his presentation on November 10th, as has Rexhep Selimi on November 11th.

The incident against Hashim Thaci, Kadri Veselin, Rexhep Selimi and Jakup Krasniqi is confirmed on October 26, 2020.