Bjelopoljka A. Š. was sentenced to six months in prison on probation for violence against her mother, and it was determined that the sentence will not be carried out if she does not commit a new criminal offense within two years of the verdict becoming final.
She was tried on charges that in May 2024, in the family home, she kicked her mother in the stomach, threw her phone at her, threw her out of the lower floor of the house, but also because five months later she threatened to kill her and make her pay for everything.
They live in the same house - the accused with her daughter on the lower floor, and her parents on the floor above.
The accused denied that she beat N. Š.'s mother, but admitted that they had not had contact since May last year because, as she stated, her mother was rude to her minor daughter while she was looking after her.
The court, however, gave credence to the statement of the injured party, who described the event in detail.
“The injured party states that her daughter A. has a bad temper and that she knows that she reacts inappropriately at the moment, that she was like that while growing up, that after giving birth she lived for a while with her common-law husband and their common-law child in their house, and after the common-law husband left she continued to live with her daughter on the lower floor of the house, and that she did not like the relationship between the accused and her daughter, and that in May 2024 she reacted by saying to her: 'What are you doing with the child, what is the problem, what is bothering you?'... Then the accused kicked her in the stomach area, causing her to bleed profusely, and when she took the phone to call her husband, the accused took the phone from her, threw it into the hallway and threw her out of the lower floor of the house, and forbade her from any communication with her granddaughter M. That on October 22, 10, after staying in her part of the house, the accused came and out of pure peace, she said to her: 'I will kill you if I am alive, you will pay me for all the witches'," the judges quote the statement of the injured party in the verdict.
According to the findings of the psychiatric-psychological expertise, the accused is emotionally unstable, immature, prone to violent and aggressive reactions, and has a lowered tolerance threshold.
The court assessed that the suspended sentence was appropriate to the degree of social danger, the personality of the accused and the consequences, and that as a warning measure it would have a preventive effect.
As mitigating circumstances, the court took into account that the accused was the mother of a minor child, that she had no previous convictions, and that the injured party did not join the criminal prosecution.
Such a verdict was issued in April by the Basic Court in Bijelo Polje, and their colleagues from the High Court there, deciding on the appeal of the defendant's defense attorney, confirmed that decision on June 11th.
The Higher Court dismissed the appeal of the defendant's defense counsel as unfounded, stating that the first-instance verdict was rendered without significant violations, that the ruling was clear and understandable, consistent with itself and the reasons, and that it contained valid reasons regarding the decisive facts concerning the elements of the criminal offense and the guilt of the defendant...
"Examining the contested verdict and the part of the decision on the imposed criminal sanction, upon the appeal of the defendant's defense attorney, this court finds that the imposed suspended sentence by which the court determined a prison sentence for the defendant for a period of six months and at the same time determined that it would not be executed if the defendant does not commit a new criminal offense within two years, after the verdict becomes final, is adequate and appropriate to the degree of social danger of the specific offense committed, the perpetrator himself and the resulting consequences, and that in the opinion of this court, within the general purpose of imposing criminal sanctions provided for in Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, the purpose of the suspended sentence from Article 52 of the same Code will be achieved," the verdict states.
"It can be reasonably expected that the suspended sentence, as a warning measure, will have a positive effect on the accused and will influence her to no longer commit criminal offenses," the verdict states.
Bonus video:
