This post is also available in: Bosnian
The first instance verdict is due to be pronounced on August 29.
Presenting her closing statement, Nada Dalipagic, Defence attorney of indictee Bogdanovic, said that the Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina had not proved the crimes charged upon the indictee.
“The Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina has not proved one single allegation contained in the indictment. In the mentioned period of time Velibor Bogdanovic was not in Mostar, so he could not have committed the crimes charged upon him,” Dalipagic said.
The State Prosecution charges Bogdanovic, who was accompanied by five members of the Croatian Defence Council, HVO, with having come to a Bosniak couple’s apartment in Mostar at night on May 25/26, 1993 and raped the woman. Bogdanovic and the other soldiers allegedly took the husband to Heliodrom detention camp, where he stayed for 30 days.
Besides that, the indictee is charged with having taken the jewelry, vehicle and a certain amount of money from the couple.
Dalipagic pointed out that two Defence witnesses offered an alibi to the indictee, by saying that he was on Mount Boksevica, which is located between Konjic and Jablanica, in the mentioned period of time, so he could not have possibly come to Mostar.
“The Prosecution has not proved that Bogdanovic was present in the injured parties’ apartment that night. None of the witnesses confirmed that Bogdanovic raped the injured party and took some things away,” Dalipagic said, adding that many of the witnesses said that they did not know the indictee and they saw him in the courtroom for the first time.
The Defence attorney said that the witness recognised Bogdanovic on the basis of a photograph 17 years later, adding that it was “an illegal piece of evidence”.
“Recognising a person on the basis of a photograph only is unlawful. It is allowed to conduct identification on the basis of a photograph only if it is not possible to do it in any other way, which is not the case here. A court decision cannot be based on a piece of evidence obtained in an unlawful manner,” Dalipagic said.
In her closing statement the Defence attorney said that the court experts, who examined the injured party’s mental condition, did not find any signs indicating that the post-traumatic stress disorder had been caused by rape in her case.
“The court experts were not able to clearly and undoubtedly say when or where she began her psychiatric treatment and what therapy was prescribed for her,” Dalipagic said.
Defence attorney Dalipagic said that the injured party’s husband intimidated the indictee and his family on several occasions.
“Bogdanovic detests rape. He used to help Bosniaks during the course of the war… His sister is married to a Bosniak man. The indictee was a decent soldier, who did not perform any function,” Dalipagic said.
