here - Humanitarian Law Center/Fond za humanitarno pravo

The court did not accept the arguments of the defense, assessing them as insincere and aimed at
helping their clients escape criminal responsibility, as well as being contrary to the testimonies of
victims, witnesses, medical expert witnesses and medical records included in the case file. On the
basis of mutually corroborating testimonies from the injured parties, Fata and Kurem Avdić, the
wife and son of the injured party Ramo, the court determined that defendant Jović, while in their
house, had placed his rifle barrel into the mouth of Ramo, who offered no resistance, and killed
him firing one shot. Their testimonies were corroborated by the findings of expert witness Dr
Đorđe Alempijević, who, after examining the autopsy report, confirmed that Ramo’s death was
caused by a bullet, fired from a rifle into his oral cavity, that exited through the back of victim’s
neck and that the victim was at the moment of firing in a standing position. The claims by Dragan
Jović that Ramo was hit by accident were refuted by the expert witness, who said that there was
little likelihood that Ramo was hit by a bullet accidentally fired while his mouth had been open.
That the accused did rape and sexually abuse Hajreta and Nizama was determined on the basis of
the honest, coherent and very convincing testimonies of the victims, to which the court gave full
credence. Their testimonies were in part confirmed by defendant Zoran Đurđević, who, testifying
in his own defense, said that Jović was “touching a women who recently gave birth” while they
were in Ramo Avdić’s house, adding that he himself attempted to rape one of the victims in
Ljeljenča. The testimonies by the injured parties were also corroborated by findings of expert
witness Dr Đorđe Alempijević, who established, upon reviewing the injured parties’ medical
documentation, that the injuries they had, were inflicted during a violent sexual attack. That the
accused, took money and valuables while in the house Ramo Avdić and Dosa Todorović was
established both on the basis of injured parties’ testimonies and the testimony of witness Dušan
Spasojević, who said that during the arrest 101 the police found money and gold jewelry on the
accused and returned it to the injured parties.
Assessing the mental state of the defendants with regard to the offence, the court found that they
committed the crime with direct intent.
The court also determined that in the commission of crime the defendants had displayed
exceptional cruelty as they treated them in particularly humiliating way, by undressing them and
taking turns raping and sexually abusing them in front of their closest family members, then
parading them naked through town, all factors considered aggravating when considering
sentence. As for mitigating circumstances, the court took into account the family circumstances
and economic situation of defendants Dragan Jović and Zoran Đurđević and the fact that Alen
Ristić was a young adult at the time of the crime. In court’s view, the sentences imposed are
101 The defendants were arrested by the Bijeljina Police Department following an incident and handed over to the
Military Police who released them a couple of days later, after which the defendants went to an area in the Zvornik
municipality, BiH and joined the paramilitary formation ‘Simini četnici’ (Simo’s Chetniks).
41