2024-07-03 11:16:34
He continues to be prosecuted for embezzling nearly BGN 100,000 and damaging the municipality with over BGN 36,000.
One of the accusations against the former mayor of Perushtitsa, Radi Minchev, who has been going around the courts since 8 years to be responsible for embezzlement and damage to the municipality, was dropped. In this case, the statute of limitations for a documented crime has expired. It is expressed in the presentation of false data for the strengthening of landslides on the Perushtitsa-Skobelevo-Churen road. Prosecutor Anna Vikova herself drew attention to the expired statute of limitations, and Minchev stated that he did not want to answer to this charge.
He was arrested as acting mayor on September 13, 2016. Subsequently, he was also charged with other charges, such as embezzlement of foreign money in the amount of BGN 99,472 and concluding an unprofitable deal, with which he damaged the municipality by BGN 36,162. He also submitted false information in a request for payment to DF “Agriculture”.
After the indictment was returned to the prosecutor’s office three times, the case against Minchev and his alleged accomplices Pavlin Statev and Iliana Pavlova started in the Plovdiv District Court.
The lawyers of Minchev, Statev and Pavlova – Matei Matev, Emilia Nedeva and Zlatka Stefanova attacked that the indictment suffered from vices.
“For the third time, the prosecutor’s office refuses to comply with the court’s instructions,” embittered Emilia Nedeva. According to her, a contradiction has been admitted, since in one place it is written how her client Statev concluded a contract, which was subsequently stated not to have been signed by him.
“I am asking you to end the court proceedings and return the case to the prosecutor’s office, which must comply not only with the law, but also with the court’s instructions, which have been repeatedly given to it,” she pleaded. The other defenders insisted on the same.
The judicial panel, chaired by Daniela Sabcheva, considered that there were no grounds for stopping the proceedings, but only in the part with the expired statute of limitations. According to her, everything was described clearly enough and she found only a factual error on the part of the prosecutor’s office, which must be corrected within 7 days.
“Successfully returning the case to the previous phase would rather do harm,” said Sabcheva.
The court’s decision is subject to appeal.