The charge brought is for murder in excess of the bounds of self-defence, the court cannot apply a more severe legal qualification, the supreme magistrates emphasize
“I am pleased – all this horror, which lasted 6 and a half years, is over and justice has prevailed. It shows that we have an absolutely fair judicial system.” Thus, Dr. Ivan Dimitrov, accused of the murder of the thief Zhoro Djevizov-Rat, which took place on March 2, 2018 in Plovdiv, commented on the final decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation that he was innocent.
Late at night on March 1st and 2nd, 2018, Zhoro Dzevizov, convicted 9 times, entered the garage in the courtyard of Dr. Dimitrov’s cooperative to steal. The medic noticed that there was a light there, but decided that it would go out later. After some time, he saw that the room was already dark, took his illegal istolet and went downstairs. The thief aimed a knife at him and wounded him in the leg, Dr. Dimitrov shouted: “Stop, police”, Rat threw a metal sign at him. The doctor fired, then the two ran in different directions. Dzevizov did not get far and in the morning his body was found on the hood of a car next to the regional administration. After the shooting, Dr. Ivan Dimitrov called a friend to look for the attacker, but they failed to find him, meanwhile the gun was thrown into a garbage container.
After the death of Zoro Djevizov, protests broke out in defense of the doctor. The district prosecutor’s office in Plovdiv charged him with murder in exceeding the bounds of self-defence. He was acquitted at first instance, the case – returned to the District Court by the Appellate Court, but the second panel declared him not guilty with the argument that there was nothing else he could have done to defend himself, except to shoot. At the second appellate hearing, Dr. Dimitrov was given 2.5 years probation because the judges decided that he exceeded the inevitable defense. A return of the trial by the Supreme Court followed, the doctor was again acquitted by the Plovdiv appeal magistrates, and now this sentence has been confirmed by the supreme judges with no further appeal options.
In their reasons, the magistrates point out that essentially all appeals are related to the non-acceptance of the legal qualification “murder in excess of inevitable defense”, but they emphasize that “the courts are bound by the framework of the factual and legal accusation raised by the prosecutor. They can amend it without his intervention only when they establish facts justifying a lesser, equal or equally serious charge.” And they add that only the prosecutor can bring a more serious charge, and that before the first instance, and this did not happen. “In other words, even if the court finds during the investigation before it that the facts substantiate the presence of a more severe qualification, it does not have the authority to apply it when issuing its judicial act,” the decision states.