Author’s analysis of contradictions in the professional reports from June 1979

Full translation of the supplied two-page author’s analysis. The source text contains no date. Its observations, qualifications and legal conclusions are the author’s analysis; the later author’s correction about the duration of the Vasić marriage is separated at the end. The listed report reconstructions and photocopies are not contained in these two pages.

Original analysis — PDF, 2 pages

Source page 1

ATTACHMENT: DOCUMENT ON CONTRADICTIONS IN THE REPORTS OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (June 1979)

Note:

The enclosed documents were reconstructed from photocopies of the originals using OCR. Although transcribed with the greatest care, minor errors in the interpretation of individual words are possible owing to the quality of the source. With each OCR version I also enclose a photocopy for comparison and confirmation of authenticity.

Brief analysis of contradictions, inconsistencies and violations of the law:

1. Information about the mother, father and origins (Jasenovac!)

• The social worker states that Gospava’s mother died in 1955 and her father was killed in Jasenovac in 1942.
• The educational specialist writes that Gospava lost both parents, “killed in a camp”, but gives no years.
• The psychologist says nothing about the camp or the parents’ deaths.

Comment: The information is neither consistent nor verified — the mother cannot have been killed in a camp in 1942 if she died in 1955. Such an unverified “insertion” of Jasenovac undermines credibility.

2. Gospava Vasić’s education and work experience

• Social worker: “completed primary school”, worked occasionally.
• Educational specialist and psychologist: “two grades of primary school”; the educational specialist states that schooling was interrupted by the war, while the psychologist refers to nine years of employment at Novkabel.

Comment: It is impossible to have completed two grades and the whole of primary school at the same time. The information has been neither reconciled nor verified.

3. Information about Milorad Vasić’s education and employment status

• Social worker: primary school and training as a painter.
• Educational specialist: four grades of primary school, highly skilled worker, brigade leader.
• Psychologist: secondary vocational education, painter.

Comment: Three different versions, without clear or verified information.

4. Information about the marriage and biography

• Only the social worker mentions Gospava’s first marriage; the other reports ignore it.
• All refer to eighteen years of marriage, but without verification or references to actual documentation.

5. The child’s status and false statements

• All reports state that the child is “without parental care”, that his father is “unknown” and that his mother’s “address is unknown”.

Comment: These statements are false and directly contradict the court documentation, probate proceedings and divorce litigation in which the father acknowledged the child and the mother was known. Articles 30, 5 and 2 of the SAP Vojvodina Adoption Act were thereby deliberately violated.

6. Property, house and material circumstances

• Only the social worker provides information about the home and property; the other reports say nothing about them.

Source page 2

7. Characteristics of the adopters — formulaic treatment

• All reports contain idealized characterizations, without a single reservation or criticism, although subsequent experience showed the opposite (violence, divorce).

8. Psychological testing and the female adopter’s literacy

• The psychologist states that Gospava “cannot read”, so verbal tests could not be administered, but does not regard this as an obstacle to parenting. The educational specialist and social worker ignore this.

9. General style — lack of analysis, stock phrases

• All reports copy one another, without serious analysis or genuine negative findings.

KEY VIOLATION OF THE LAW:

All the above contradictions clearly show that:

• The facts relevant to the child’s identity and origins were not established;
• The fact that the child has acknowledged parents and rights arising from the probate hearing was deliberately ignored;
• The procedures under the SAP Vojvodina Adoption Act — Articles 2, 5, 11 and 30 — were not followed;
• The entire documentation is formulaic, with a clear aim: to avoid establishing the truth and to formalize an unlawful procedure.

Attachment 1 — OCR reconstruction of the social worker’s report;
Attachment 2 — OCR reconstruction of the educational specialist’s report;
Attachment 3 — OCR reconstruction of the psychologist’s report,

with photocopies of each.

Later author’s correction — duration of the Vasić marriage

The author explains that later, probably in July 2025 according to his approximate recollection, he obtained divorce records containing the Vasić marriage certificate. The certificate confirms the eighteen-year duration of the marriage, so he withdraws his earlier doubt about that information. The historical analysis above remains unchanged; the eighteen-year duration is no longer disputed by the author.