The Municipal Court in Zagreb handed down sentences to eight minors following attacks and robberies of men in the area of Vrbovec. The court found that the individuals were involved in four attacks during June and July of last year. The ruling, issued on 1 September, became final on the same day as the parties waived their right to appeal.
The minors met men via the Grindr app, subsequently assaulting them and stealing mobile phones, money, and documents. In several instances, one of the minors contacted the men via the application, posing as a male, while the others waited nearby or in hiding. A review of the mobile phones revealed that the group coordinated the attacks via WhatsApp and Snapchat. The court noted that the messages indicated the group acted on a joint decision, motivated by the prospect of obtaining items found on the victims.
One of the men attacked stated that he had arranged a meeting with someone who introduced themselves as a 20-year-old man. After arriving in Vrboce by train, the man was taken by the person he had met via the app to concrete blocks beside the railway line. At one point, the young man heard a loud voice say, 'So, how is life?' before three masked men in black emerged from the darkness. One of them slapped him, after which they began striking him with their fists and demanding his mobile phone and wallet. The man handed over his phone and cards, but the attack did not cease. He stated that they continued to kick him as he lay on the ground, with one attacker shouting, 'Don't pretend.' He was beaten for several more minutes, and his trainers were torn. Following the attack, he reported that he could not sleep, feared going out, and that the impact of the assault was still affecting his work and social life.
The second man had the bottom of his right eye socket fractured by the attackers, according to the court ruling. His bag, containing documents, bank cards, and money, was taken. A judicial expert determined that the injury was serious. Another man was also seriously injured in the attack. He stated that he had arranged a meeting via Grindr, but upon arriving in Vrboce, several people approached him. He lost consciousness after the first blow. 'They broke my eye socket, knocked out a tooth, and fractured two or three ribs,' he stated in his testimony. He stated that he ended up in hospital and that a mesh was implanted in his eye due to the injury. In the fourth case, a man was attacked on a football pitch. The attackers surrounded him, and he sustained a fracture to his lower jaw. Following the attack, he stated that he still felt fear that someone might attack him again, and he avoided evening outings. In the statements of the two victims, it was noted that no homophobic insults were heard during the attack. One of them stated that he believed the motive for the attack was purely financial gain, while the other did not know the motive for the attack. The court also noted that the communication of the minors indicated that the attacks were motivated by the prospect of obtaining items found on the victims. In part of the reasoning explaining the sentences, the court described the behaviour as 'characterised by elements of hatred' and noted the need to develop tolerance.
All eight appeared before the court, admitting to the offences. They stated that they were genuinely remorseful and had apologised, promising that such behaviour would not be repeated. The court found that, prior to and following these incidents, they had not been recorded as perpetrators of criminal offences or misdemeanours. The court concluded that the incidents were 'isolated, exceptional, and impulsive'. For four of the group, the court took into account the intensity of their involvement, and as a result, they were removed from their community and sent to a disciplinary centre for two months. The remaining four were given a reprimand and ordered to complete 30 hours of community service within six months. The remaining four received a similar reprimand and the same 30-hour community service requirement. The enhanced supervision can last from six months to two years. The court warned that the measures imposed could be replaced by harsher penalties if the minors failed to comply with the sentences.
