—Sylvester Loving, B1Daily

In Belgrade, justice has taken a second swing and this time it landed heavier.

The parents of a teenage boy who carried out one of Serbia’s most devastating mass shootings have been sentenced to prison in a retrial, marking another chapter in a case that has forced the country to confront uncomfortable questions about responsibility, parenting, and the boundaries of legal guilt.

The boy was just 13 years old when he entered Vladislav Ribnikar elementary school in 2023 and opened fire in a hall and classroom. In a matter of minutes, just over two, the violence unfolded with devastating speed. Nine children and a school security guard were killed immediately, and another child later died in hospital. Five more students and a teacher were injured.

The shooter was below Serbia’s age of criminal responsibility and was placed in a psychiatric institution rather than tried as an adult. But the legal system turned its attention elsewhere: his parents.

A Trial That Became a Proxy for National Grief

The retrial in Belgrade centered on a difficult legal and moral question: how far does parental responsibility extend when a child commits an unthinkable act?

The court concluded that it extended far enough to warrant prison sentences.

The father, Vladimir Kecmanović, received 14 years and six months for charges including serious offences related to public safety and allegedly training the boy in handling firearms while failing to secure them properly. The mother, Miljana Kecmanović, was sentenced to two years and 11 months for neglect of a minor.

Both parents had already faced trial once before. That earlier case resulted in mixed findings, including convictions, acquittals, and legal contradictions that led an appeals court to order a retrial in late 2025. Judges said the original reasoning had been unclear and inconsistent—an extraordinary rebuke in such a high-profile case.

The Gun, the Safe, and the Chain of Responsibility

Central to the prosecution’s argument was access.

The boy reportedly took two handguns from his father’s safe before placing them in a backpack and bringing them to school. Those weapons became the instrument of a tragedy that unfolded in under two minutes, with prosecutors stating that 66 bullets were fired in that short span.

For the court, the key issue was not only possession, but control. Whether the parents had taken adequate steps to secure lethal weapons in a home where a minor could access them. Whether warning signs had been ignored. Whether negligence, even without intent, could still carry criminal weight.

The prosecution argued that accountability was essential not just for justice, but for societal reckoning. Convictions, they said, were part of how Serbia would process one of the darkest moments in its peacetime history.

Defence: No Proof of Neglect, No Clear Standard

The parents’ legal team pushed back sharply.

They argued that the case lacked firm expert evidence proving neglect. They also insisted that responsibility was being stretched beyond what the law clearly defined, effectively turning a tragic outcome into a criminal certainty.

The defence also pointed to the earlier trial, arguing that the retrial did not materially change the facts that had already been examined, and in their view, already misinterpreted.

Both sides have now appealed, meaning the legal battle is far from over.

A Country Changed in Two Days

The shooting did not occur in isolation.

Just two days after the school massacre, another gun attack near Belgrade killed nine more people in a drive-by incident. The back-to-back tragedies triggered mass protests, with tens of thousands of citizens demanding reform and accountability.

In response, the Serbian government introduced stricter gun laws and a weapons amnesty program, aiming to reduce the circulation of illegal firearms.

But legislation alone could not quiet the deeper national anxiety: how did a country with no history of school shootings suddenly experience one of the worst in Europe?

The Emotional Fault Line

At the center of this case is more than legal responsibility, it is collective grief searching for structure.

For families of victims, the sentencing represents recognition that the tragedy had preventable elements. Their legal representative called the retrial a “long fight,” signaling that appeals will continue and closure remains distant.

For others, the case raises uneasy questions about fairness: can parents be fully criminally responsible for the actions of a child in crisis, especially one below the age of prosecution?

And for Serbia as a whole, the case has become a mirror, reflecting debates about gun culture, youth mental health, institutional oversight, and the limits of legal systems to assign blame after catastrophic violence.

A Verdict That Doesn’t End the Story

Even with prison sentences issued, the story remains unresolved.

Appeals are pending. Public debate continues. And the deeper societal questions about prevention, warning signs, and systemic responsibility, remain open.

The courtroom may have issued penalties, but Serbia is still grappling with a more complicated verdict: how to understand a tragedy that unfolded in less than two minutes, but will echo for decades.

—Sylvester Loving, B1Daily