The Municipal Court in Rijeka, Permanent Office in Opatiji, found two men, aged 25 and 28, guilty of a brawl that took place in Kastav during this year's White Sunday. The court determined that by participating in a physical altercation, they had particularly brazenly disturbed public order and peace, and were fined €700 and €400 respectively, totalling €1,100.
The incident occurred at approximately 22:30 on St Lucy's Square in Kastav, during the traditional White Sunday event. According to the verdict, the two men physically clashed with a third man, delivering multiple blows to his head and body. One young man sustained head injuries, which the verdict describes as superficial, as confirmed by medical documentation submitted to the court. The police filed an indictment against them for an offence against public order and peace.
Both men admitted during the proceedings that they had participated in the physical confrontation, although they claimed they did not start the fight. The first accused, the 25-year-old, stated in his defence that he had not intended to participate in any brawl or quarrel. According to him, the injured young man approached him without reason, possibly due to previous disputes, and punched him twice in the jaw. He then moved towards him, and the young man, he claims, grabbed him with his hands and began to choke him. His cousin, the 28-year-old second accused, then joined the fight, hitting the injured man in the face with his hand to force him, according to his own claims, to release his relative. The first accused admitted that he then also punched the injured man in the head three or four times. He explained that after the young man fell to the ground, he noticed blood on his head, then became frightened and left because a group of young men with hoods was approaching, whom he assumed were friends or acquaintances of the injured man.
The second accused, the 28-year-old, described in his defence that he had come to White Sunday that evening with his cousin and another acquaintance to eat something after a full day's work. He stated that at one point they were near a stand selling pancakes and fritters, where, according to his claims, the injured young man attacked his cousin and began punching him in the face and head. He added that someone also hit him on the head from behind, causing him to stagger. When he straightened up, he saw that the injured man was holding his cousin in a grip he described as choking. He tried to separate them and told the young man to let him go, but when he did not, he hit him in the face with his hand. He stated that the two men then fell to the ground, where the shoving, wrestling and hitting continued. He admitted that his cousin probably hit the injured man several more times, but claimed that everything happened very quickly and he could not clearly see every blow. In the end, he managed to pull his cousin out of the fight and they left the scene, admitting that their departure was not correct. He also stated that the third man with them had tried to stop two other young men who were in the company of the injured man.
The court did not accept the defendants' defence as a reason for exemption from criminal liability. The verdict's reasoning highlighted that both admitted participating in the physical confrontation, making it indisputable that their behaviour had disturbed public order and peace. The court considers that even if the first accused was the first to be attacked, this does not justify continuing the physical altercation. In such a situation, the first accused should have tried to block the blows, move away or flee, instead of continuing to hit the other man, the verdict states. The court also concluded that the second accused was not entitled to join the brawl and hit the injured man, regardless of his claim that he was trying to protect his cousin. Although he was charged with delivering multiple blows, the court determined that by admitting to one blow, he had fulfilled the elements of the offence for which he was charged.
The court fined the first accused, the 25-year-old, €700, taking into account that he had previously been criminally punished, including for offences under the Aliens Act and the Road Traffic Safety Act. As a mitigating circumstance, the court considered his awareness of the offence committed. The second accused, the 28-year-old, was given a lighter fine of €400. The court took into account that the second accused had not previously been criminally punished, that he is the father of two minor children, and that he has no regular income. Both were arrested after the incident and spent a certain amount of time in police custody. The court deducted this time from their fines, granting each a reduction of €79.64. Thus, the first accused must pay €620.36, and the second accused €320.36. They are obliged to pay the fines within 30 days of the verdict becoming final. Due to their financial circumstances, the court exempted them from paying the costs of the criminal proceedings. This is a first-instance verdict of the Municipal Court in Rijeka, Permanent Office in Opatija.
