Milic Defence Releases Statement, Claims Frame-Up

After three weeks of silence, Veselin Milic, the former chief of the Belgrade police, has spoken for the first time about the charges keeping him in custody. His defence lawyer, Nemanja Vasiljevic of the “Vasiljevic legal” firm, announced on June 3 that he had submitted the full statement Milic gave that same day to the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade.

The release of the statement immediately opened a twin dispute over what actually happened. The defence claims the entire case is a set-up, while prosecutors say false and malicious interpretations are trying to damage the investigation. In other words, each side accuses the other of misleading the public.

What does the defence claim, and what have prosecutors confirmed?

According to the statement released by the defence, Milic says he left the restaurant “27” in the Senjak district about 35 minutes before the killing and went home. That, the statement says, could be confirmed by his wife, his elder daughter and the building’s cameras. In the released statement, however, that alibi is not backed by any footage and has not been independently checked, so it remains a claim made by the defence.

Vasiljevic stressed that after three weeks no evidence had been presented linking his client to the charges.

“Three weeks after the proceedings began, no evidence has been presented that would link Milic to the serious and untrue charges, and he still remains in custody,” said lawyer Nemanja Vasiljevic.

From the statement itself, the defence also quotes Milic’s words: “It has been established that we left the restaurant about 35 minutes before the killing.” The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade has repeatedly said the opposite.

“Inaccurate, generalised, invented and malicious interpretations of the events at Senjak are seriously attempting to undermine the credibility of the investigation,” reads the statement from the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade.

What is not in dispute is the legal framework. Milic is named in the investigation order alongside ten other people, on suspicion that, as chief, he failed to report knowledge of the serious killing of Aleksandar Nesovic. He remains in custody. Everything beyond that, who is right about what happened at Senjak, is the subject of an investigation that has not concluded.

What remains unverified?

Most of what was presented to the public on June 3 falls into the unconfirmed category. The claim that the whole case is a “frame-up” and that police officers “maliciously wrote falsehoods” is an assertion by Milic and his lawyer, and prosecutors have not confirmed it. The alibi of 35 minutes, supported by family and cameras, is likewise a defence claim that is not documented in the released statement.

It is also disputed who gave the statement. Some outlets, including Radar and Danas, say prosecutors gave inaccurate information when they mentioned only Milic, while according to those reports the defence was put forward by a larger number of suspects. Prosecutors have not explicitly denied this, but called for restraint.

For now there are two versions, one put forward by the defence and one defended by the prosecution, and neither has been legally established. The statement released on June 3 is a defence document, not a verdict and not a finding of the investigation.

Do you believe the public can judge where the truth lies at this stage, or should we wait for the investigation to present evidence?