Aggregated public profile · Not an official account.

Bartosz Malewski wrote that the man was detained on charges of making criminal threats against the prime minister, referring to Article 190 of the Penal Code. He pointed out that — as he stated — such threats must instill fear of their fulfillment, and the prosecution of this crime takes place at the request of the injured party. #prawo #Polska #premier (translated)

Bartosz Malewski informed that the court did not grant the prosecution's request for a month of temporary detention for Piotr. According to Malewski, the prosecutor justified the request with concerns that Piotr might hide and an assessment that there is a high probability of him committing further crimes. Malewski wrote that together with lawyers Magda Prządka and Magda Majkowska, he convinced the court that there were no grounds for imposing detention. He claimed that it was not sufficiently substantiated that Piotr had committed the alleged acts and that Friday's events should be treated as an incident requiring thorough explanation. According to Malewski, Piotr has a permanent place of residence, is socially engaged, and is a firefighter in the volunteer fire department, so there is no real risk that he would hide. He added that after the defenders reached him, Piotr, feeling safer, started limited cooperation with the authorities. Malewski also emphasized that the lack of cooperation is Piotr's right and should not be a basis for preventive measures. Malewski also assessed that the forecast for further criminal activity had no rational basis. He wrote that Piotr had not been convicted and that his behavior on Friday was not aimed at committing the alleged acts, which, in Malewski's view, undermined the legal qualification adopted by the prosecution. He informed that the court did not apply other preventive measures, such as police supervision, and that Piotr would respond to the charges at liberty. He added that assistance was provided as part of a procedural intervention by Ordo Iuris. #wolność #sprawiedliwość #prawo (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that prosecutor Anna Osypiuk wanted Piotr to be placed in detention for a month, justifying it with — as the author assessed — a completely irrational fear of his escape and hiding. According to Malewski, when the prosecutor announced she would submit a motion for temporary detention to the court, Piotr fainted and fell. An ambulance was called, and Piotr was to be taken to the hospital. #sprawiedliwość #prokuratura #polska (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that prosecutor Anna Osypiuk wanted to apply a one-month detention against Piotr, justifying this — in his opinion — with an unfounded fear that the man would escape and go into hiding. He added that when the prosecutor announced the issuance of the decision, Piotr fainted and fell. An ambulance was called, and the man was to be transported to the hospital. #prawo #prokuratura #sprawiedliwość (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that the detention protocol and charges were presented to Piotr 30 hours after his arrest. He assessed that this was the first properly conducted action in the proceedings and added that during this time Piotr was removed from handcuffs for the first time. According to Malewski, Piotr was charged with forcing police officers to refrain from taking action and violating the bodily integrity of the police officers. In the case of one of the officers, the charge was said to include actions threatening loss of life or serious bodily harm. Malewski cited the provisions: Article 224 § 2 of the Penal Code in conjunction with Article 222 § 1a of the Penal Code in relation to Article 57a § 1 of the Penal Code in conjunction with Article 11 & 2 of the Penal Code, as well as Article 224 § 2 of the Penal Code in conjunction with Article 222 § 1 of the Penal Code in relation to Article 57a § 1 of the Penal Code in conjunction with Article 11 & 2 of the Penal Code. He stated that Piotr did not admit to the alleged acts and refused to provide explanations, but he submitted an extensive statement about the course of events from his own perspective and about the period of detention so far. Malewski also informed that a request had been submitted, among other things, for an examination of Piotr's health status. #policja #prawo #sprawiedliwość (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that he recognized an officer in the recording who the day before had stated that the detainee was refusing the assistance of a defender. According to Malewski, the policeman claimed at that time that he had not spoken to the detainee and transmitted information on the orders of superiors, whom he could not identify. Malewski noted that in the recording, the officer informs the detainee about the appointed lawyer, whom the detainee does not know, but does not say that the authorization came from the detainee’s wife. He wrote that the detainee did not trust the police officers and therefore refused, and he described the conditional access to a lawyer based on providing personal information as scandalous. He added that the officer's final words indicated his self-satisfaction. He also stated that the publication of the recording by the Police KSP, which — as he wrote — was supposed to be considered a strong argument, showed that such practices are standard there. #policja #prawonaprawde #sprawiedliwość (translated)

Bartosz Malewski informed that after more than 24 hours, he and his team gained access to the detained Piotr. According to him, during the conversation, seven police officers were present in the room, who remained there the entire time, which Malewski considered a violation of the right to defense. He wrote that Piotr had his hands tied behind his back the entire time, and the police justified this measure with an alleged threat to safety, without explaining what it was. The handcuffs were moved to the front for a few seconds so that Piotr could sign a power of attorney for defense and a statement. Malewski reported that Piotr's health condition was poor, he could barely sit, and he felt threatened. He added that the detainee did not know the reasons for his detention and no charges were presented to him. Piotr wanted his defenders to be present at all activities. #Prawo #Obrona #Policja (translated)

Bartosz Malewski described the course of actions taken in connection with the detention of Piotr. He wrote that at around 10 PM, he joined attorney Magda Przadka, who had been at the station on Wilcza Street since 7 PM, and the first actions in the case had been conducted since 3 PM. Malewski reported that he went to the KSP at Nowolipie Street, where—according to expectations—the detained person was supposed to be taken, and where the defense lawyers were supposed to participate in the proceedings. According to him, for two hours no one came out to them, and the duty officer, with whom they spoke by phone, claimed he did not know if Piotr was at the station. After that time, an officer from Wilcza, Marek Gruchała, was supposed to convey that the detained person did not want to contact his defenders. Malewski noted that a temporary authorization for defense had been granted by Piotr's wife. The defenders demanded, as he wrote, direct contact so that the detained person could confirm this information, but they were denied. They also did not obtain the name of the officer conducting the proceedings. Upon returning to Wilcza, Malewski and Przadka reportedly tried unsuccessfully to obtain information from the duty officer. Malewski described that after a brief conversation with people in the adjacent room, the policewoman announced that all information had already been conveyed to them, after which she left. He added that the lights were turned off there, and the reception area remained empty. After about an hour, the police spokesperson reportedly stated again that the detained person did not want to contact either his defenders or other individuals, including his wife. According to Malewski's account, the spokesperson announced further actions with Piotr for 5:10 PM but did not provide a specific time. Malewski evaluated that this indicated an announcement of conducting them without the participation of defenders. #Prawo #Polska #Policja (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that along with attorney Magda Prządką, he was at the police station on Wilcza Street to talk to the person conducting the investigation regarding the detained Piotr. According to his account, the policewoman at the reception refused to provide information and walked away, while the officers in the room behind the reception turned off the lights and pretended they were not there. #Polska #Policja #Protest (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that the police, represented by Asp. szt. Marek Gruchała, did not allow him and the lawyer Magdalena Przadka to see the detained Piotr. According to Malewski, the officers claimed that the detainee refused legal assistance. He added that he and Przadka had been authorized to defend him by the man's wife and demanded contact with him. Malewski asserted that the police were obligated to allow them access to the activities with the detainee. #policja #adwokat #prawo (translated)

Bartosz Malewski wrote that he was at the Capital Police Headquarters with attorney Magda Prządka, where Mr. Piotr was supposed to be transported from the police station on Wilcza Street. According to Malewski, the police were still preventing contact with the detained person, and the duty officer did not know whether the man was present. #policja #zatrzymanie #sprawiedliwość (translated)