Prosecutor’s Office is looking for life in prison for perpetrators of Vanja and Pance killings

The Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office today in the closing remarks of the trial of the murder of Vanja Gjorcevska and Pance Zezhovski demanded the maximum sentence of life in prison for four defendants Ljupco Palevski, Vlatko Kesishev, Bore Videvski and Velibor Manev, while Vanja’s father was sentenced.

As prosecutor Ana Stojkovic Dimitrovska pointed out, the statements of the defendants given before the prosecution do not match the statements given before the court, nor, as he said, coincide with the evidence presented. According to her, it is not necessary to determine the motive for the murder, but, as he said, he is a subjective attitude of the criminal to the crime.

– The motive is not necessary to determine. He is the subjective attitude of the criminal to the crime. The absence of a motive is no reason for anyone to be convicted. The punishment under the Criminal Code is from 10 years to life. There are no mitigating circumstances for the defendants. Everyone is in adulthood, they are all parents, they wanted to be a political factor. They further traumatize the family and the public with their denial of evidence and manipulations. For all four, the Public Prosecutor’s Office is looking for life in prison. Deprivation of a child’s life is not tolerated – the prosecutor said.

For Vanja’s father, Aleksandar Gjorcevski, the prosecutor said: « There is no more severe punishment from a child loss and life with such a conscience as in the case of Vanja’s father, defendant Aleksandar Gjorcevski. We do not claim to have wanted to kill his child. »

Stojkovic Dimitrovska referred to the defense given by defendant Velibor Manev. He stressed that the defendant claimed that they wanted to grab Pance, but not to kill him, and that Vanja was grabed by mistake, but, as he said, both claims were unfounded.

– Velibor claimed that they wanted to grab Pance, not to kill him. But Palcho killed him, and Velibor agreed. He even buried Pance and did not report to the police. He took the « Citroen ». He joined the second work. He bought gloves, clean traces. He participated because he benefited. He wanted money, irrelevant whether with kidnapping or murder. He also took a shovel, beside the adhesive tape, a sack, so he was agreed with a second murder. He claimed to be a mistake, but this was not founded. Everyone said they had a picture of the child, they knew who would grab. This defense is given with a desire to reduce responsibility. It is undeniable that he cooperated in the discovery of the works – said Stojkovic Dimitrovska.

He added that the prosecution’s statement given by defendant Bore Videvski coincides with the statement of the other defendants. He says his defense consists of denial before the court, although he has previously recognized the offenses that are being charged in the statement given to the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

– The prosecution’s statement coincides with the statement of the others. There is no evidence of torture, he did not complain to the prosecution. Torture uses it as an excuse. He told details that he was surprised that he was caught and had no time to think of a defense. He knew everything, time and place of the works. His statement to the prosecution coincides not only one, but with three statements by the other defendants. And for Alexander gave the same statement as Manev. It is also unfounded that he was at work on the critical day, not. Footage from Veles asked the defense as evidence, but those footage did not have the defendants. He has a gun, but he doesn’t know where he is. He did the works and did not show remorse – the prosecutor said.

Defendant Vlatko Kesishev said that he tried to portray himself as an obedient to the first defendant Ljupco Palevski and that he was not a co -enforcement agent, but according to the prosecutor, the evidence shows that he was an enforcement agent, because he was digging a hole in the house.

– He is aware that Palevski had a gun and that there was a man in the gap. After the killing, he participated in the burning of the « Citroen ». If he saw what had happened to Pance, he could have guessed what would happen to the second kidnapped face. The evidence against him is irrelevant. His contribution to the discovery of the works is evident, but he, as Manev, missed out everything and showing remorse – the prosecutor said.

For the first defendant Palevski, it was emphasized that he was conducting the entire operation, creating alibi and destroying evidence. According to the prosecution, footage and other evidence determines his guilt.

-It was confirmed that the footage of the house in May was from another time, May 2023, but they did not have the « Renault Kangu » vehicle before September 2023. Palevski was trying to create an alibi for himself. On November 22, Alibi tried to be Erol Osmani, that he had repaired the boiler, but Osmani claims another. There is no alibi on November 27, claims he was in the bank, but it is after 11am, and the child was killed before 9. He claimed there was no data from the base stations for his phone, but they exist and do not support him. During the crime they carried radio stations. All defendants have calls after 11am – the prosecutor said.