[ad_1]
The mysterious, so-called “technical” file No. 80 is considered the main reason for the prosecution of the former heads of NAKA Ľubomír Daňko, police officers Pavel Ďurka and Ján Čurilla, and prosecutor Michal Šúrek. They allegedly used this file in a way that they interrogated penitents who were supposed to testify about all criminal activities. They created an imprecise case, not accusing anyone, but simply interviewing witnesses. With this strategy, NAKA investigators ensured that both the big names in major cases such as Purgatory, Judas and Tavern, as well as their defense lawyers, could not obtain this information from witnesses.
According to the indictment, a group of police officers chose who to investigate and what to investigate in separate proceedings.
In addition to document numbered 80, there is a similar document numbered 154.
Police inspection investigator Kevin Dlabaj is convinced that prosecutors and police officers abused their power as public officials. He believes that the four defendants should have acted in a coordinated, consensual and purposeful manner. For example, these police officers and prosecutors were also involved in the large police case in Purgatory, where Norbert Bödör, Tibor Gašpar and Robert Krajmer faced prosecution.
Special File No. 80 was created in late March 2021, several months after the mass arrests of former police officers in the Purgatory case and the indictments of police officers or former investigators in the Judas or Bozimulini cases.
Technical documents
According to the investigator examined by Dela Baja, the four defendants deliberately prepared a dossier on the investigation of an unknown criminal group and corruption in order to be supervised by the Special Prosecutor’s Office. In justifying the resolution, he claimed that the defendants knew in advance that no one would be charged under this dossier and that the criminal prosecution would eventually be terminated, which did happen. Last August, an investigator actually suspended the prosecution on the grounds that it was impossible to charge specific people based on the evidence obtained.
“The convenience of conducting criminal proceedings in this way, among other things, allows the execution of criminal proceedings according to the needs foreseen by the accused, without the presence of a defense lawyer, with the aim of obtaining undue benefits, including non-compliance with the principles of criminal proceedings, circumvention of criminal law provisions and obtaining predictive information, which in this case is correct, but it is impossible to obtain the legally conducted criminal proceedings,” said the inspector of the inspection. The interrogation in file No. 80 was used by police officers of the Očistec working group, which was responsible for the largest cases of the past period.
Casualties: Familiar names
In the case of a criminal offence of abuse of power, the official or police officer or prosecutor must have the intention to act unlawfully, i.e. he consciously wanted to harm someone. The Ombudsman described this intention as an attempt to hinder the fundamental right of defence of a defendant who does not cooperate with the investigation, thereby interviewing witnesses without the knowledge of others. On the other hand, he considered the possibility of finding out in advance what witnesses knew and tactically coordinating their subsequent appropriate interrogation as an unauthorised benefit.
“Through this process, they also gain an advantage over the defense because they already know in advance what the defendant will be able to testify about, which allows them to strategically ask questions during the regular process of trial or not ask questions about facts that they do not want included in the testimony or that would question the witness.”
As confirmation of the prosecutor’s involvement in the conduct, the police officer in the inspection considered that “for less than 29 months, the supervisor did not carry out prosecutorial supervision actions arising from the performance of duties to monitor the legality of criminal proceedings.” Prosecutor Sulek “.
In response to Denník N, the accused former NAKA leader Ľubomír Daňko said: “I have never made a mistake, I don’t even understand what I am accused of. I should have decided who will carry out what actions, but this was determined by my position as the head of the liquidation task force,” Daňko said. We are waiting for the reaction of the other defendants and their lawyers.
On the contrary, the victims in the case of the police and prosecutors are the people they prosecute in the Purgatory case. This is Norbert Bödöra, MP Tibor Gašpar (Smer) and the businessman accused in the case of Mýtnik Jozef Brhel. Since they are damaged, they can view the documents, see the statements and obtain the evidence taken.
They interviewed confessors and police officers
The investigation interviewed several witnesses, such as businessman Michal Suchoba, who confirmed that he was interrogated “in the so-called house of Ramak” in May and June.
“He was not given instructions and was not familiar with the subject of the interrogation, which was conducted in such a way that he only talked about criminal matters of which he had knowledge, and he was told that the content of his testimony was ‘very little’,” the inspector said. Paraphrasing Sukob’s words. Businessman. An entrepreneur in the IT sector who admitted to past corruption, was convicted of bribery and had previously cooperated with the police. Now he has confirmed to the Inspectorate that he was aware of the “technical dossiers” that collected his statements and information on criminal activities.
Collaborators Bernard Slobodník, Daniel Čech and František Imrecze also testified during the examination. They all confirmed that they had been interviewed before the summer of 2021, until the so-called ” File No. 80 or 154.
“I submitted these criminal reports for several days, and I want to state that these reports were then also deepened in my interrogation in the procedural status of a witness, and the investigator Fakasova prepared it, I mean it was prepared and printed, and I just signed it. I never read the content of the records, I believed the investigator that he would write it down the way I said it,” Slobodnik testified before the inspector in June this year.
Fico Case Investigator
The investigator also processed another already mentioned file No. 154 – this file was supposed to be created based on the testimony of witness Michal Suchoba, who also testified several times in file No. 80. Here he relied on the testimony of Suchoba and former NAK police officer Jaroslav Vereščák, who was also initially investigating the Twilight case. In this case, Robert Fico and Rob Kaliniak also face charges. The prosecution against them was terminated by the Office of the Prosecutor General under Article 363 on the grounds of illegality.
According to the inspectors, File No. 154 was also purposeful. According to Derabai, who was on inspection, there was no logical reason to repeatedly interrogate Suchoba, first in one “technical file” and then “in the same non-procedural manner” in another “technical file”.
“Vrešac from eastern Slovakia will come again, acting only as a recorder, without knowing about the acts for which criminal proceedings are being conducted, so the witness logically does not know about the acts for which he is being questioned and for which the proceedings are being conducted, and therefore he again talks about everything he knows, that is, he repeats his previous statements, except that Veresčak was instructed that he should deliberately omit information and circumstances about certain unwelcome criminal acts that were pre-selected during the interrogation,” commented the police officer in the examination.
Former investigator Vereščák was one of the members of the “clearance” team, who interrogated several witnesses from File No. 80, such as Suchoba, Čech and František Imrecze. During the examination, he said that he was not aware of the conduct of the criminal prosecution and did not even have part of the contents of File No. 80, except for the minutes of the interrogations he conducted himself. According to him, he gave the minutes to Pavlo Churek.
“By the term technical dossier, I made it clear that the penitents would be questioned, subsequently these crimes and acts would be selected from them, and new criminal proceedings would be initiated based on these questionings, and this was actually the explanation given to me why it was necessary to hide these certain paragraphs. It was explained to me that if charges were filed, the defense lawyers would have access to the file, they would extract information from it, and this was not desired. This was explained to me by Ďurka, Čurilla and Daňko,” a former investigator from the Očistec team testified during the examination.
Lipšic: It’s always been done this way
Former special prosecutor Daniel Lipsitch, who as a supervisor assigned the “technical dossier” to his colleague Sulek, also reacted to the new allegations.
“In the past, in the case of the Thick Neck criminal group, a special criminal file was kept, in which witnesses were questioned about further criminal activities of members of the criminal group, which were not included in the initial indictment. Subsequently, the recommendation for the implementation of the criminal case was withdrawn, while charges were filed for other acts committed by the criminal group. It is important (and it should still be the case today) that these statements were true and led to further charges for serious crimes,” Lipsitch wrote in a status on the social network.
“The procedural procedure described is absolutely more correct than writing formal records of new acts or producing non-procedural written records without properly instructing the interrogated persons about the consequences of false testimony and false accusations. Therefore, this procedure has never been questioned by anyone. Of course, at that time it only involved “thick-neck” criminal groups, not influential “white collars”, the former special prosecutor said in defense of his colleagues.
[ad_2]
Source link
