The Court of Appeals overturned the verdict of those convicted of the double murder in Veruša

The Court of Appeals overturned the verdict of those convicted of the double murder in Veruša and returned the case to the Podgorica Higher Court for a retrial.

This was announced by the Court of Appeal, explaining that in the process of deciding on appeals filed against the verdict of the Higher Court in Podgorica, they accepted the appeal of the Special State Prosecutor's Office and the appeals of the defense lawyers of the accused Marko Zekić, Miomir Đukić, Dragan Biletić, Mirčeta Mihajlović, Goran Milašinović, Branislav Ivanović and Zlatko Drašković.

"So, in response to these appeals, he ex officio overturned the aforementioned verdict and returned the case to the first-instance court for a retrial."

"By the verdict of the first instance court, the accused Marko Zekić and Miomir Đukić were sentenced for the criminal offense of aggravated murder committed against NP and DP in the town of Uvač (Veruša) and the criminal offense of attempted aggravated murder in Berane, to single sentences of long-term imprisonment of 40 years each, while the accused Mirčeta Mihajlović was sentenced for the criminal offense of aggravated murder committed against NP and DP in the town of Uvač (Veruša) to a long-term imprisonment of 30 years. By the same verdict, the accused Goran Milašinović, Dragan Biletić, Branislav Ivanović and Zlatko Drašković were sentenced to 10 years in prison each for the criminal offense of murder by aiding and abetting. By the aforementioned verdict, the accused Vasilije Đukić and Nenad Milačić were acquitted of the charge of intentionally aiding in the commission of the criminal offense of aggravated murder, the accused Zlatko Drašković was acquitted of the charge of money laundering, and all the accused in these proceedings were acquitted of the charge of creating and being a member of a criminal organization," the Court of Appeals specified.

They state that, in their opinion, numerous significant violations of the provisions of criminal procedure were committed in the process of passing the first-instance verdict and in the verdict itself: "Which violations were reasonably pointed out in the appeals, as well as the violations that this court established ex officio, for what reasons the verdict could not be examined on its merits, which made it necessary to quash it and return it for a retrial."