Paška, who has Ukrainian citizenship but was born in the Czech Republic, made a so-called declaration of guilt at the beginning of the main trial, so the court had to deal primarily with the sanity or possible insanity of the defendant.
“The crucial question after the declaration of guilt was whether he acted under the influence of a mental disorder, which would reduce the degree of his culpability,” said the chairman of the senate, Michal Roubíček. “Two expert opinions clashed in the case,” he continued. According to the first of the preliminary proceedings, Pašku does not suffer from a forensically significant disorder, in contrast, according to the second opinion, which was prepared by the defense, Pašku suffers from paranoid schizophrenia, under the influence of which he should have been at the time of committing the crime.
Part of the punishment is also banishment from the republic for an indefinite period, and Paška must also pay 880,000 crowns as non-pecuniary damage to the survivors and the state.
Judge Roubíček criticized the second of the opinions mainly for formal errors. The second pair of experts brought in an interpreter who was also a specialist in the field to assess the defendant, and allowed that interpreter to test the defendant as well. “This is something completely inadmissible,” commented the judge, saying that the experts who drew up the original report defended it during the confrontation, which is why the court sided with it.
“I am very sorry for what I did. I don’t know how to fix it all,” said Pašku in conclusion. “I killed him because I wanted to go to jail,” he added.
A man admitted to the court the murder of the Bolt driver in Prague. He explained the reasons for the act in a confused manner
He murdered Paška in November 2022 on Prague’s Černý Most, where he was brought by Bolt from the center of Prague. He had a ride called by a random passerby in Štěpánská street near Wenceslas Square via the Bolt app. Even then, he said, he knew that he was going to commit murder and wanted to take possession of the victim’s car. He had actually been planning the act since the morning of the incriminated day. In Černý Most, he bought a sharpener for his knife, which he didn’t think was sharp enough to attack a taxi driver with.
After sharpening his knife, he looked around the shopping centers for the less frequented street Bryksova. He then drove to the city center and had himself driven back to Prague 9, where he attacked the driver behind whom he was sitting with a knife. First he stabbed him in the neck, then he said he wondered whether to cut his throat or inflict more wounds. In the end, he chose the second option and stabbed the driver dozens of times with a knife. Paška then threw the man’s body on the street and drove away from the scene. The life of the driver could not be saved despite the efforts of rescuers. In the meantime, Paška drove to a nearby gas station, where he began washing the interior of the car from the blood. However, he was immediately detained by the police.
“I thought if they caught me and sat down I would be safe. I was afraid that they wanted to kill me, so I thought it would be better if I was in prison,” the 26-year-old man said at the beginning of the trial in August. When asked by the judge who, according to him, wanted to kill him, he replied that he did not know. Other parts of his statement also sounded confused and incoherent.
Paška has Ukrainian citizenship, but he was born in Jihlava, where his parents ran a business. The family then returned to Ukraine, where Pašku attended 11 grades of school and, according to his words, had problems with drugs. He recounted ending up in a mental hospital for three weeks after climbing the monument and setting his clothes on fire. In Kyiv, he subsequently reportedly suffered a head injury while “trying to catch a truck.”
He also stated in court that he left his parents because he wanted to be independent, then again stated that he was afraid they wanted to kill him. He allegedly wanted to forcibly steal the car and go to Poland or Germany, where he wanted to look for work. At the same time, he said, he wanted the police to catch him, but he had no idea that it would happen so soon.
The plaintiff suggested 18 years, the defense acquitted
The plaintiff, Taťána Prici, considered the defendant’s guilt proven, not only due to his confession, but also on the basis of witness statements or expert opinions. Given that, according to Prici, Paška premeditated the murder, acted for selfish reasons, and moreover attacked the victim in a particularly cruel and painful manner, Paška proposed an eighteen-year prison sentence.
The defense, on the other hand, recalled an alternative expert opinion that it had drawn up, according to which Pašku was and was insane at the time of the crime. According to defense experts, he is unable to recognize whether his actions are motivated by delusions or hallucinations or reality.