Kostya K.'s parents re-sentenced: Father sentenced to 14 and a half years in prison, mother nearly three years

In a landmark decision, the Higher Court in Belgrade has once again sentenced Vladimir and Miljana Kecmanović, the parents of Kosta K., who carried out a mass shooting at the Primary School “Vladislav Ribnikar” in May 2023. This marks the second time the couple faces a first-instance conviction after their initial sentencing was overturned by the Appellate Court due to procedural violations. The new verdict sees Vladimir Kecmanović receiving a prison term of 14 years and six months for neglect and abuse of a minor, as well as a serious offense against public safety. His wife, Miljana Kecmanović, was sentenced to two years and eleven months for similar charges. Both have the right to appeal the decision before the Appellate Court in Belgrade.

The tragic incident occurred when Kosta K., who was under 14 at the time and thus not criminally responsible under Serbian law, entered the school armed with two pistols belonging to his father. During class, he opened fire, killing ten individuals—nine students and one school security guard—and injuring several others, including students and a history teacher. The attack shocked the region and raised pressing questions about parental responsibility, access to firearms, and the safety of educational institutions. The court's decision underscores the gravity of the situation and the legal consequences faced by the parents for their alleged role in the tragedy.

The trial took place on June 18, 2026, with both accused arriving at the Palace of Justice. Vladimir Kecmanović was transported from custody, while Miljana arrived freely. Among those present were members of the families of the victims and injured individuals, who hold the status of victims in this case. The chief public prosecutor, Nenad Stefanović, argued before the court that the maximum sentences should be imposed because the evidence clearly demonstrated the couple’s guilt and there were no mitigating circumstances. He requested a total prison term of 14 years and 11 months for Vladimir and three years for Miljana. In contrast, the defense sought an acquittal, asserting that the charges against them lacked sufficient proof and that they had not committed the offenses attributed to them.

Vladimir Kecmanović, during his closing remarks, expressed that he would bear the burden of this tragedy for the rest of his life but maintained that he and his wife were attentive and careful parents who could not have foreseen their son’s actions. He described the situation as a rare and unpredictable event, akin to a black swan—a highly improbable occurrence with catastrophic consequences. He also stated that he would have reacted differently if anyone around him had suggested that his son might have issues. Earlier insights into family dynamics indicated that communication within the household was formal, with significant pressure placed on achieving perfection and ignoring the child’s problems.

The previous trial was annulled by the Appellate Court due to significant procedural errors, which deemed the reasons for the initial conviction unclear and contradictory. The Higher Court was ordered to rectify these deficiencies, properly apply procedural rules, and clearly establish all decisive facts. The Appellate Court upheld part of the original conviction regarding Miljana Kecmanović but modified the penalty section following the appeal by the defendant’s attorney, Nemanja Marinković.

During the earlier proceedings, the victims' families and their representatives delivered closing statements emphasizing the importance of this verdict. They stressed that it was not about reclaiming the past but about saving the future. All victims agreed that the Kecmanovićs were guilty and deserved to be convicted for the tragedy that extinguished ten lives—those of nine students and a school guard.

Reconstructing the events leading up to the attack, the court detailed how Kosta K. planned the assault weeks in advance. According to the court's findings, he took two pistols and ammunition from a drawer in his home the evening before the attack and hid them in his desk. Throughout the night, he searched online for information such as “Serbia introduces life imprisonment” and “can a gun lock be opened.” He also prepared improvised Molotov cocktails intended to carry with him. On the morning of the attack, he photographed the weapons, ammunition, and incendiary devices, placing them in a backpack before heading to school. Two minutes before entering the building, his mother sent him a message asking, “Did you manage to get to class?” Shortly thereafter, he entered the school grounds.

Kosta K. reportedly spoke briefly with the school security guard, Dragan Vlahović, before pulling out a pistol and beginning the shooting spree. In the entrance area, the security guard and three students were killed. He then moved toward the history classroom, continuing his gunfire. The court noted that he fired a total of 66 shots. From the first shot to his exit from the classroom, just over two minutes passed. Afterward, he went outside, discarded one of the weapons, and called the police. During the call, he mentioned that he had fired using his father’s pistol and did not know how many people were injured or killed. He claimed he called the police himself because he believed it was the correct thing to do and feared being harmed or killed by someone else. He also stated that he committed the crime because he considered himself a psychopath.

The court highlighted that the attack was meticulously planned over two to three weeks. During this period, Kosta K. compiled a list of students, created a sketch of the school, and gathered information related to antisocial behavior, psychopathy, and criminal penalties. Some of the search terms he allegedly used included “antisocial behavior in children,” “I love animals can I be a psychopath,” and “death penalty in Serbia.”

This case continues to resonate deeply within Serbian society, prompting discussions on mental health, parental oversight, and the accessibility of firearms. As the appeals process unfolds, the focus remains on ensuring justice for the victims while addressing broader societal concerns.