Prosecutor: Agreement possible in Milić case before trial

Retired prosecutor Jasmina Paunović has offered insights into the indictment against Veselin Milić, suggesting that a plea agreement could be reached before the main trial commences. The Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade has formally charged Milić with two offenses: failure to report a crime and falsifying official documents.

“

all until the main hearing is scheduled according to the indictment, an opportunity can be concluded with the accused.

Paunović explained that as long as a main trial date has not been set, the possibility of reaching an agreement with the accused remains open. She noted that the indictment against Milić appears to have been separated from that of other co-defendants, a move she believes might be strategic.

“

It seems to me that only an act separated from the indictment was submitted to the Higher Court so that the Higher Court would declare itself not competent.

"It seems to me that only an act separated from the indictment was submitted to the Higher Court so that the Higher Court would declare itself not competent," Paunović stated. She anticipates that the Higher Court may rule it lacks jurisdiction over the case, given the nature of the charges, and refer it to a basic court.

“

Because the Higher Court in Belgrade does not decide on that type of criminal offense, those are under the jurisdiction of the basic prosecutor's office, i.e. the basic court, it should be expected that the Higher Court will declare itself so by making a decision that it is not competent.

This potential jurisdictional shift could impact the proceedings. Paunović also pointed out that Milić has seemingly been in a more privileged position compared to other defendants from the outset, with his charges undergoing reclassification. The indictment against Saša Vuković for murder and illegal weapons possession, and findings from a medical commission indicating Aleksandar Nešović was shot multiple times, were also mentioned in the context of the ongoing legal scrutiny.

“

which would determine the manner, place and all characteristics of the gunshot wounds inflicted on the victim, the deceased, in order to determine exactly at what moment the victim died, whether there was a moment when he was alive at all, all this indicates to us what we have heard, that he was inflicted more than 10 gunshot wounds directly in very short intervals, this can be qualified as aggravated murder in a treacherous manner, especially since the victim did not defend himself, he did not have the conditions for something like that.