sixty-six bullets in one hundred twenty-one seconds
In Belgrade, the parents of a thirteen-year-old who carried out Serbia's first school shooting have been sentenced anew in a retrial — the father to nearly fifteen years, the mother to nearly three — for the failures of guardianship that preceded sixty-six bullets fired in just over two minutes. Because the boy himself was too young for criminal prosecution, the courts have turned to those who shaped his access to weapons and, by extension, to the question every society must eventually ask after such violence: who bears responsibility for what a child becomes. The verdicts are under appeal, and the families of ten dead children and one slain security guard continue to wait for something that may never fully arrive — not justice, exactly, but at least an accounting.
- A thirteen-year-old's two-minute rampage through a Belgrade school in May 2023 killed ten people and became the wound around which an entire country's sense of safety collapsed.
- Because Serbian law shielded the boy from prosecution, his parents became the focal point of a nation's grief and demand for accountability — a pressure that has driven the case through two trials and counting.
- The first convictions were overturned on appeal in late 2025 for contradictory reasoning, forcing victims' families to relive the ordeal in a retrial that began in January 2026.
- On June 18, 2026, new sentences were handed down — fourteen and a half years for the father who trained his son with guns and left them unsecured, nearly three years for the mother convicted of neglect.
- Both sentences are already under appeal, and lawyers for the victims' families describe the pursuit of justice as a long fight with no clear end in sight.
On the morning of May 3, 2023, a thirteen-year-old boy took two handguns from his father's safe and walked into Vladislav Ribnikar school in Belgrade. In one hundred and twenty-one seconds, he fired sixty-six bullets. Nine children and a security guard died at the scene; a tenth child died later in hospital. Five more were wounded. It was the first school shooting in Serbian history, and it broke something in the country that has not fully healed.
Because the boy was thirteen, Serbian law placed him in a psychiatric institution rather than a courtroom. Accountability fell instead to his parents, Vladimir and Miljana Kecmanović. Vladimir faced charges tied to training his son to use firearms and failing to secure them; Miljana was charged with neglect. The case became a mirror held up to a family, a school system, and a society asking how this had been allowed to happen.
A first trial in 2024 produced convictions, but Serbia's court of appeal overturned them in November 2025, finding the reasoning unclear and contradictory. The case was sent back. Vladimir remained in custody; Miljana was released. The retrial opened in January 2026, with prosecutors arguing that convicting the parents was inseparable from understanding how Serbian society had failed at one of its darkest moments.
On June 18, 2026, new sentences were issued: fourteen years and six months for Vladimir, two years and eleven months for Miljana. Both are under appeal. A lawyer for the victims' families called it a long fight that would continue through the appellate courts.
The original attack had sent tens of thousands into the streets in protest. The government responded with a gun amnesty and stricter firearms laws. Two days after the school shooting, a separate gunman killed nine more people near Belgrade, compounding the national trauma. For a country where mass gun violence had been almost unimaginable, the reckoning is still unfolding — in courtrooms, in appeals, and in the grief of families for whom no verdict will ever be quite enough.
On the morning of May 3, 2023, a thirteen-year-old boy walked into Vladislav Ribnikar school in Belgrade carrying two handguns he had taken from his father's safe. In the span of two minutes and one second, he fired sixty-six bullets through the school's hallways and classrooms. When the shooting stopped, nine children and a security guard lay dead. A tenth victim, a girl, died later in the hospital. Five more children and a history teacher were wounded. It was the first school shooting in Serbian history, and it shattered the country's sense of safety in ways that would reverberate for years.
Because the boy was thirteen, he could not be prosecuted as an adult under Serbian law. He was placed in a psychiatric institution instead. But his parents—Vladimir and Miljana Kecmanović—could be held accountable. They were charged with neglect and abuse of a minor. Vladimir faced an additional charge of a serious offense against public safety, stemming from his role in training his son to use firearms and his failure to secure the weapons properly. The case became a proxy for a larger reckoning: how had a family, a school, and a society allowed this to happen?
The first trial concluded in 2024. Vladimir was sentenced to a long prison term for his role in the shooting's mechanics—teaching the boy to handle guns, leaving them accessible. His wife was acquitted of illegal firearm possession but convicted of neglect. The verdict seemed to offer some closure, some assignment of responsibility. But in November 2025, Serbia's court of appeal overturned the decision, ruling that the reasoning behind the convictions was unclear and contradictory. The case would be retried. Vladimir remained in custody; Miljana was released pending the new trial.
The retrial began in January 2026. The chief prosecutor argued that convicting the parents was essential to understanding how Serbian society had failed at one of its darkest moments. The judge, laying out the facts again, emphasized the mechanical brutality of what had occurred: sixty-six bullets in one hundred twenty-one seconds. The defense countered that the prosecution had not proven neglect, that no expert testimony had established the boy had been mistreated or deprived. They argued the court was simply repeating the logic of the overturned verdict.
On Thursday, June 18, 2026, the court issued new sentences. Vladimir Kecmanović received fourteen years and six months in prison. Miljana received two years and eleven months. Both verdicts are under appeal. Zora Dobričanin, a lawyer representing the families of the victims, called the trial a "long fight" that would continue through the appellate process. The case is far from over.
The 2023 attack had triggered an immediate and visceral response across Serbia. Tens of thousands of people took to the streets in protest. The government responded with a gun amnesty program and new, stricter firearms laws. Two days after the school shooting, another gunman killed nine people in a drive-by attack near Belgrade, deepening the sense of crisis. For a country where mass gun violence had been virtually unknown, the shock was profound and lasting. The retrial of the parents, and the appeals that will follow, represents an ongoing attempt to assign responsibility and meaning to an event that still defies easy explanation.
Notable Quotes
The trial represents a long fight that will continue in the court of appeal— Zora Dobričanin, lawyer representing families of victims
Convictions for the parents would provide part of the answer to how Serbian society responded to one of the most tragic events in the country's peacetime history— Chief prosecutor, during retrial arguments
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the court order a retrial if the first verdict seemed to settle the matter?
The appeals court said the original reasoning was contradictory—the logic didn't hold together. They wanted clarity on what exactly the parents had done wrong, and how the law applied to it.
But the second trial reached the same conclusion, didn't it? Both parents guilty of neglect?
Yes, but now it's been tested again, and both sides have appealed. The defense is arguing the prosecution never actually proved neglect happened. It's a question of evidence and burden of proof.
What does it mean that the boy was thirteen? Why does that matter so much?
In Serbia, you can't be criminally responsible until you're older. So he goes to a psychiatric institution instead of prison. His parents become the legal focal point—they're the ones who can be held accountable for what he did.
Do the parents' sentences feel proportional to what happened?
That depends on what you think parental responsibility should be. The father trained the boy to shoot and left guns accessible. The mother was convicted of neglect. But the defense says the evidence of actual neglect was never clearly shown. It's still contested.
What happens now?
Both sides appeal. The case moves to a higher court. The families of the victims are still fighting for answers. This isn't finished.