Most people assume the attack was a random act of violence. It was a targeted execution, announced in advance. The perpetrator, Juraj Krajčík, published a manifesto on the messaging app Telegram hours before the shooting. He identified the bar Tepláreň by name and described its patrons as ‘degenerates.’ His writings cited a Slovak far-right extremist who had murdered LGBTQ people in the past. At approximately 7:00 PM, he opened fire with a legally owned weapon outside the bar’s entrance.
Two people died from their wounds: Matúš Horváth, a 23-year-old bisexual man, and Juraj Vankulič, a 26-year-old non-binary person. A third person was injured. Krajčík fled. His body was found the next morning in a district north of the city, dead from a self-inflicted gunshot. The police confirmed the digital trail linking his online ideology to the physical crime. The attack was not a spontaneous outburst but a calculated act of ideological terrorism.
The Slovak interior minister initially described the shooting as having ‘no relation to the sexual orientation of the victims.’ This official denial of a clear hate crime motive sparked immediate outrage from the LGBTQ community and its allies. It exposed a governmental reluctance to name and confront anti-LGBTQ extremism. The manifesto and target selection made the motive unambiguous, yet authorities hesitated to frame it as such.
The deaths of Horváth and Vankulič became a catalyst. Vigils across Slovakia drew thousands. The attack forced a public reckoning with the rhetoric of far-right groups and the real-world consequences of online hate speech. It underscored a chilling reality: in Slovakia, as in much of Europe, violent intolerance had moved from anonymous online forums to a specific street corner on a Wednesday evening.