Two forensic examinations appointed in the case against Georgi Semerdzhiev showed different results for the presence of drugs in his blood. He is accused of the serious investigation of July 5, 2022, in which two young women died at the intersection in front of the capital’s Hemus Hotel. The prosecutor’s office claims that Semerdzhiev was driving after using drugs and at an excessive speed. He has been in custody since last year, and the trial is still in the first instance.
There is here, there is not
The toxicochemical examination, on which three specialists from the Institute of Forensics of the Ministry of Internal Affairs worked, shows that there was amphetamine in the driver’s blood, it was learned at the next hearing in the case. Another conclusion, the forensic chemical examination, however, did not report the presence of a drug. Its authors are two experts.
The difference in the results is due to the research methods, the experts explained to the court. In both conclusions, the sensitivity of the materials used is different. In the first (positive), for example, the level of concentration of the drug is not examined. With the second, the presence can also be reported, but only if the accepted substance is above a certain concentration.
The authors of the first study also pointed out another problem. According to the sample taken, it was not stored properly and was handed over to them frozen. This does not allow the presence of alcohol to be tested. The second sample was not frozen. A psychiatrist also testified before the court, according to whom Semerdzhiev said that he had taken drugs days before the accident.
The problem of the concentration of drugs among drivers in our country is old. The current regulation does not take into account its level and impact, only its presence.
Carelessness
At the beginning of the investigation, the prosecutor’s office threatened to charge Semerdzhiev with a crime committed with possible intent. This makes it possible for him to be punished more severely if found guilty.
At the start of the real trial, however, this position was changed. The prosecutor’s office announced that there was no way to defend the thesis of possible intent, because before his car hit the dead women, there was a hit in a taxi. Therefore, it cannot be said that he could have foreseen what would happen and was in agreement with the possible consequences.
The prosecutor’s office has already suffered one failure on a charge of intent in the case of the death of journalist Milen Tsvetkov. The accused Christian Nikolov was sentenced, but only to nine years in prison.
