Albin Kurti and Vetevendosje: Clarification

I usually let sleeping dogs lie on certain issues. But I feel I had to comment on the following statement published in Newsletter 70 of the Vetevendosje website ( It reads:

The prosecution will present the witnesses against Albin. They are all police officers. Albin has not called any witnesses for his defense because, to do so, he must request permission by the court.

Vetevendosje’s statement about Albin not calling any witnesses is true. But the implication is completely wrong.

First, the normal order of a trial is that the prosecution goes first with its case because it has the burden of proof. Only after does the defense call his witnesses, if he so chooses.

The fact is this: Albin has not called any witnesses because the prosecution is not done with the case!!! I’m sure he’ll have his opportunity to do so.

Vetevendosje also says:

Some of these policemen were questioned without the presence of the defense, but their submissions were signed by the court appointed defense council.

To begin, there is no requirement that the defendant or defense council be present at every questioning period. It is only if the prosecution plans on using the statements against the defendant, does either the defendant or the defense council have to be present.

Also, Vetevendosje’s statement suggests that Kurti’s court appointed defense council was not present at certain times when the police were being questioned during the investigation, but instead signed it later, thus allowing those statements to be admitted into evidence. This is completely false. Speak with those who know Mr. Hasolli, Kurti’s former defense council. It flies right in the face of what Vetvendosje is saying.

I’m not sure why Vetevendosje misreports on so many issues surrounding Kurti. When they do that, it really undermines many of the good things they are trying to accomplish.


3 thoughts on “Albin Kurti and Vetevendosje: Clarification

  1. I picked up your comment through a link when you visited the site dedicated to his release, and have passed it on to the editor of the newsletter, asking for clarification.

  2. Dear “B.S.”

    Thank you for your comment. I am happy to engage in a dialogue.

    Although I do make criticisms of the way certain groups are reporting the Kurti trial, let it be clear that I believe the real criminals on 10 February 2007 are not in Kosovo, but Romania. It’s a complete shame that the head of DOJ, Robert Dean, has made no real attempt to prosecute those criminally involved. If they put as much effort as they did in attempting to prosecute Kurti, then I’m sure there would at least be an indictment against the Romanian police, as well as the UNMIK police chief, who criminally shot the two protestors. If there needs to be transparency, more needs to be done on the killing.

    Mr. Cheeseburger 9000

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s