Economist not to interfere in police matters

Prosecutor Jovanka Čizmović assessed that the head of the criminal police, Milovan Pavićević, cannot talk about official notes, because he is an economist by profession.

Lawyer Zoran Piperović said that this was written in Čizmović's appeal against the decision of the Basic Court of Kotor, which acquitted his client, inspector Đoka Golubović, of abuse of office.

Golubović was tried on the charge of falsifying the contents of an official note, in which he wrote that former Minister of the Interior Raško Konjević used the services of prostitute Marija Milovanović.

"There are really interesting passages in the complaint of prosecutor Čizmović. In one, it is written that the policemen who testified - Petar Rolović, Saša Milić and Pavićević are not telling the truth, and that the truth is being told by Marija Milovanović, whose character and work the prosecutor is trying to preserve. In the complaint, she also wrote that the witness Pavićević cannot speak about official notes, how they are made and used, and that he cannot use the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure because he is a graduate economist. "Can you imagine that the prosecutor cancels the testimony of the head of the criminal police of Montenegro by saying that he does not know that, because he has a degree in economics", said Piperović.

The lawyer also claims that in the appeal the plaintiff confused the article of the CPC that talks about when official notes are made at the moment when there is a suspicion that a criminal offense has been committed.

"No criminal offense was committed here and Đoka Golubović did not say that someone had committed a criminal offense even when he was making an official note. Even if that official note is correct, that Minister Konjević slept with that woman, it is not a criminal offense, but it is compromising from some other side that is interesting to the police, and he has the right to make an official note about that knowledge," said the lawyer. .

Golubović's defense attorney said that because of the article of the CPC that the prosecutor apostrophes in the appeal, he must clarify that Golubović's writing of the note cannot refer to that article of the Law.

"Golubović did not say that Konjević committed a criminal offense, but that he doubts that Milovanović is telling him the truth... Even if that official note is correct, it does not mean a criminal offense. It is just one of the thousands of official notes that police officers make every day about information that does not necessarily mean a criminal offense. That is some interesting knowledge from the aspect of the service, and for that he is not obliged to inform the prosecutor, he asks for his consent to take a statement and make an official note, because the party does not sign that official note. It is unverified information about something he found out during operational work and delivered to the senior officer," explained the lawyer.

Golubović was acquitted by the first-instance decision of judge Danijela Samardžić due to lack of evidence.