Thaci's defence finds a mistake in the final file: We placed Krasniqi on Thaci's threats.

Prosecutor Matt Halling acknowledged that in their final file, Jakup Krasniqi was placed in claims to have carried out threats instead of placing Hashim Thaci. “Thaci's defense in the transcript... had found a mistake in our final file where we wrongly placed Krasniqi's contribution and had mistook him with threats [...]
Prosecutor Matt Halling acknowledged that in their final file, Jakup Krasniqi was placed in claims to have carried out threats instead of placing Hashim Thaci.
Thaci's subservation in the transcript... had found a mistake in our final file where we wrongly placed Krasniqi's contribution and we had it wrong with Thaci's threats. I mean, we shouldn't have said it was a contribution Krasniqi made to”, Halling said.
Halling said they do not mean that they make mistakes when they include persons related to their contributions, but added that none of the court evidence they have can be undone.
We don't mean that we never make any mistakes when we involve individuals regarding the contribution. However, we cannot undo all the court trials we have”, he said.
Before that, however, Halling said Krasniqi has been part of the General Staff like all other indictees.
“Jakup Krasniqi has been part of the General Staff as all accused”, he said.
The prosecutor said the accused chose to be part of Staff for a long period of time, while crimes were taking place for which the charges in the court case were also brought.
“Tried to be part of the General Staff over a long period of time, while the crimes for which the charges are filed in this court case continued to be carried out in accordance with communications, orders and decisions of the General Staff”, the prosecutor said.
He added that what the General Staff has done has been individual responsibilities.
Whatever General Staff did, of course, has individual responsibilities. The accused do not have to identify with names on every single test we have to conclude they made a criminal contribution”, he said.
He said it is not new that are focused solely on incriminating evidence and that they have ignored excusing evidence./Periscopi/












