Historic verdict: Court sentences "Barber of Malca" to life in prison for abusing a girl

The Higher Court in Nis today passed the first life sentence in Serbia after the abolition of the death penalty - specifically, since May 2019 when amendments to the Criminal Code came into force, which allow for life imprisonment for the most serious crimes. Shortly after 11 am in the courtroom number 90 of the Higher Court in Nis, Judge Tamara Savic sentenced Ninoslav Jovanovic (48) to life in prison for brutally abusing a 12-year-old girl from the vicinity of Nis.

Coincidentally or not, the sentencing was scheduled on the same date when a year ago this sexual predator was arrested, after a 15-day search unlike any that Serbia had seen before.

Jovanovic was previously twice convicted for similar crimes and has already spent a total of 22 years behind bars.

The judiciary had no tools to stop him, because the maximum prison sentence for the acts he committed was at the time 15 years.

Judge of the District Court in Nis Radomir Mladenovic expressed regret that, as he said, "his hands had been tied" when he in 2006 sentenced Jovanovic to 15 years in prison for raping one and attempting to attack another girl.

Explaining the verdict, he expressed his belief that Jovanovic would repeat the crime, which came true on December 20, 2019, when "the Barber of Malca" ("Malcanski Berberin") - i.e., Jovanovic, nicknamed in that way for his habit of cutting off his victims' hair before assaulting them, kidnapped the 12-year-old girl.

However, thanks to the new law, the judiciary now has the opportunity to imprison Jovanovic and his ilk forever and protect potential new victims from those persons who have proven to be incorrigible in their ways.

During the entire court procedure, Jovanovic did not show any remorse, but tried to minimize his responsibility. He justified his actions as being mentally ill, and when he realized that this defense would not work, he asked for the dismissal of the deputy prosecutor, the senior public prosecutor, the judge and the court chamber, and even the president of the Higher Court. He asked for access to court records in a desperate attempt to find any omissions that would enable him to postpone the inevitable verdict, because he knew very well that the judiciary would do its best to make sure no other child experiences the fate of his victims.

A carefully led procedure

The criminal proceedings against Jovanovic were carefully conducted, precisely to make sure there were no mistakes that would call into question the viability of the verdict before the Court of Appeals, because there is no doubt that the accused will appeal this first instance decision. Each of his requests, which had a legal basis, had been granted, so a different defense counsel was assigned to him ex officio, to make sure he would not be denied any rights.

The verdict, in addition to punishing the perpetrator, should also provide some kind of satisfaction for the victim.

However, Aleksandra Karimanovic, the mother of the abused child, said that there is no punishment that would be appropriate for the crime committed against her daughter.

"I am upset, I hope for life imprisonment but then again I'm afraid that he will get away with a more lenient punishment. It's very difficult for us, we are waiting for that verdict to free us at least to some extent from that burden. No punishment is enough, no matter what happens, our and her pain will not go away," the mother of the victim said before the court announced its ruling.

The new law, however, stipulates that life in prison can be reduced, and that a convicted person can be released on parole after 27 years - unless they are murderers of children, pregnant women or infirm persons.

Jovanovic does not fall into this category, so he could be released early, at the age of 75.

The Supreme Court of Serbia has already done so once when in 2006, instead of letting him serve 15 years, it reduced his sentence to 12 years in prison. This mistake was paid dearly by an innocent girl, his next victim, so the judiciary has a great responsibility not to repeat it again.

(Telegraf.rs)