Milenkovic’s defense: First-instance verdict cannot stand, we will prove his innocence in the next stage of proceedings

The defense team of Dragisa Milenkovic, who was sentenced today by the Basic Court in Pristina to seven years in prison for a war crime, stated that the first-instance verdict cannot hold and emphasized that they will do everything in the appeal process before the Court of Appeals to prove Milenkovic’s innocence.

Attorney Dejan Vasic stressed that the court had evidently placed its trust in the testimony of high-ranking political figures, which influenced the verdict.

“The defense believes that the court faced a choice—whether to believe the testimony of today’s high-ranking political figures in Kosovo, who did not speak the full truth and accused Dragisa of something he did not do, or to believe the defendant. It is clear that the court believed those witnesses, who likely carry a certain authority due to their positions, and passed the sentence it did. We have no doubt whatsoever that in the next stage of the proceedings, through the appeal we will file with the Court of Appeals, we will succeed in proving Dragisa’s innocence, because this man is not guilty of what he was sentenced for today,” said Vasic.

Attorney Jovana Filipovic emphasized her firm belief that such a verdict cannot stand and that the Court of Appeals will properly assess all contradictions the defense will point out.

“There were 18 witnesses, four of whom were alleged victims who do not know Dragisa at all—he was not familiar to them, not even as a figure—they had never seen him before. And those statements contradicted the testimonies of the witnesses who accused him in some way. Not a single witness provided realistic accusations against him. Some didn’t mention him at all. Some witnesses were not even located. The court decided otherwise. We don’t know for what reason—we’ll see once the written justification of the verdict is released—but we are confident that this verdict cannot remain legally valid. We believe the Court of Appeals will properly evaluate all the inconsistencies we have pointed out, particularly concerning the witnesses who were heard,” Filipovic said.