Search

Magdalena Prządka-Leszczyńska contacted TVP Info with a request to indicate which day the gathering referred to in the recording took place, or to deny that it was recorded on October 14. She wrote that in her opinion, the material was from the day when an ambulance was called for Adam Borowski, and not from the day of Piotr's detention. She stated that she and Magda Majkowska are defenders, not politicians, and that they have been acting in Piotr's case since October 16, 2026, at 3 PM. She added that their statements concerned only the events of October 16 and the period of the man's detention. Prządka-Leszczyńska emphasized that everyone has the right to defense, the assistance of a defender, and a fair trial, and that the role of a lawyer is to defend a person subject to preparatory proceedings. She also pointed out that merely committing an act does not determine whether a crime has been committed or whether it was the crime attributed to the given person. She requested that her statements not be used for political manipulation or media insinuations. https://t.co/4IM4bWegy6 #prawo #obrona #sprawiedliwość (translated)

The District Court of Warsaw-Centrum dismissed the prosecutor's request for detention of Piotr W., who was arrested after an incident in front of the Constitutional Tribunal, and his lawyer thanked TV Republika for their support. #PiotrW #areszt #TrybunałKonstytucyjny (translated)

Ales Bialiatski, a Belarusian human rights defender and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, criticized Donald Trump's emotional statements, emphasizing that Norway should respond to his actions in the context of Alexander Lukashenko's violations of agreements. #PokojowaNagrodaNobla #AleśBialacki #DonaldTrump (translated)

The Ordo Iuris Institute wrote that the refusal to provide an explanation by the suspect should not be a basis for temporary detention. Attorney Magda Majkowska from Ordo Iuris, Piotr's defender, said that this is his right and that the prosecution cannot justify detention based on it. She added that she has never encountered a case where the mere refusal led to detention. In her opinion, this could mean using detention to force the suspect to provide an explanation in order to regain his freedom. The Institute defined the right to remain silent as a fundamental procedural guarantee and stated that exercising it should not be associated with negative consequences. #Prawo #Sprawiedliwość #Obrona (translated)

Wojtek Spartan 2.0 Aristodemos - Spartiata wrote that Piotr was the target of political attacks and a victim of abuse of power. He claimed that officials beat him severely and subjected him to mental pressure and blackmail while in custody, and prevented him from contacting his defender. He added that Piotr did not succumb to the pressure and remained true to his principles. https://t.co/ePU7FGhxsX #PrawaCzłowieka #Sprawiedliwość #Protest (translated)

Magdalena Prządka-Leszczyńska wrote that the citizen weakened at the prosecutor's office and was taken to the hospital, and his lawyer had to fight with the police for access to the suspect. She added that the suspect submitted a written request for the lawyer's participation in these activities. She described the situation ironically as a return to normalcy. #prawo #prokuratura #obrońca (translated)

Magdalena Majkowska wrote that the prosecutor's office announced it would submit a request to the court for a one-month detention for Piotr. She added that at the end of the proceedings at the prosecutor's office, Piotr fainted, and his lawyer called an ambulance. #Polska #Prokuratura #Sąd (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk wrote that the revealed recordings raised questions about the reason for the police check on the man who was, as he suggested, connected to the protest. According to his reconstruction, the officers followed the man for several dozen meters, demanded his personal information without providing a specific reason for the check, and then incapacitated him inside the building. Kusznieruk noted that the man pushed the officers away and fled inside, but he believed that this did not explain the earlier decision to conduct a check. The author claimed that the man lost consciousness during the intervention, and the knife found with him was not presented as having been used. He also questioned the proportionality of the force used and whether the man deliberately attacked the policewoman when the window broke. Furthermore, he described that several hours later, the detained man was informed that he could meet with lawyer Magdalena Leszczyńska if he provided his details. According to Kusznieruk, the man did not know the lawyer and did not want to see her, while the police considered this a refusal to contact a defense attorney. Kusznieruk also criticized the statement by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who — as he wrote — linked the matter to President Nawrocki. He asked whether the police acted on the orders of superiors, collected data on demonstration participants, and previously observed the man. He directed questions to the Polish Police and the Ministry of Interior and Administration regarding who ordered the identification of Piotr and on what basis. He warned that if the identification of protesters occurred without legal grounds, it could mean using the state apparatus to control citizens. #Polska #Policja #protesty (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk reached out to Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Minister Marcin Kierwiński, and the Chief Police Commander with a question about the responsibility for the treatment of the detained Piotr W. He referred to a statement from the detainee, in which he described a lack of contact with his wife and designated defenders, the non-receipt of a copy of the detention protocol, as well as head injuries, dizziness, pain, and bruised wrists. He also accused the authorities of failing to provide appropriate medical diagnostics. Kusznieruk inquired about recordings from body cameras and the complete medical documentation, as well as why the detainee was cut off from his family and defenders. He called for an explanation of the allegations, and in case even part of them is confirmed, for immediate oversight actions and consequences for those responsible. He indicated that Tusk bears political responsibility for the government's actions, Kierwiński for supervising the Police, and the Chief Commander for the functioning of the subordinate formation. He emphasized that the Police should adhere to the law, and the responsibility for overseeing the services should not be limited to press conferences. #PrawaCzłowieka #Polska #Policja (translated)

Magdalena Prządka-Leszczyńska criticized the recording published by the Capital City Police Headquarters. She wrote that the officer did not inform the detainee that his wife had also appointed Bartosz Malewski and Jerzy Kwaśniewski as defenders. According to her, the detainee said he was unaware of these defenders or that he could trust them. The author added that the day before, the officer visible in the recording assured her that he had no direct contact with the detainee and was only relaying information from his superiors. He was also said to have stated that he could not provide the recording. Prządka-Leszczyńska noted that this statement was recorded by Republic TV. #Policja #Prawo #Bezpieczeństwo (translated)

The post's author stated that the recording published by the Police was supposed to prove manipulation and the unacceptable conditioning of contact with the lawyer on the performance of actions demanded by the officers. He also claimed that the police officer was prompting the detainee with answers. In the further part, he began an argument regarding the lawyer presenting a power of attorney from the detainee, but the post was cut off in the middle of a sentence. #policja #prawo #sprawiedliwość #PL (translated)

ExplicitePL wrote that the recording was supposed to show police officers choking a man while they were lying on him. According to the author, PAP removed the false message about a "knife attack," and the detained Piotr had no contact with defenders for eight hours — the entire night and morning. The author also claimed that the duty officer pretended that Piotr was not there, and the situation was being recorded by cameras. ExplicitePL stated that the police maintained that the man voluntarily waived his right to defense and contact with his wife, even though he lost consciousness during the intervention. He asked the KSP Police for documentation of these refusals and referred to Article 42, paragraph 2 of the Constitution, stating that the right to defense does not depend on the police's acknowledgment. #policja #prawo #skandal (translated)

Magdalena Prządka-Leszczyńska asked the Warsaw Police Headquarters when the detained Piotr would be able to contact his wife. She wrote that the woman has not been in touch with him for two days, is terrified, and fears the worst. She added that the officers are avoiding contact with the media, lawmakers, and defenders, and described the situation as a difficult time for women's rights defenders. #Polska (translated)

Adam Mazguła criticized those protesting in defense of the Constitutional Tribunal, claiming they were manipulated by the politics of PiS and Karol Nawrocki. According to him, the protesters defended abuses related to the Tribunal, which — as he wrote — PiS had previously destroyed and subordinated to party interests. Mazguła reminded that the Constitutional Tribunal consists of 15 judges elected individually by the Sejm for 9 years, according to Article 194, paragraph 1 of the Constitution. He asked why Nawrocki does not accept the oaths of the judges if he does not elect them. He argued that the Tribunal should protect citizens against abuses of power, including from the government of Donald Tusk. The author accused Jarosław Kaczyński, Nawrocki, and the television stations he described as spreading Russian propaganda of inciting protests. He urged Poles not to support — as he put it — political oppression, and encouraged photographing and documenting the participants of the protests. #PrawdąWOczy #WPoczuciuOdpowiedzialności #TarczaWolnościSłowa #BronimyKonstytucji #ŻołnierzGorszegoSortu #PrawaCzłowieka #WolnośćSłowa #ŚwieckośćPaństwa #PrawaKobiet #BronimyKonstytucji #PrawaCzłowieka #WolnośćSłowa (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)

Magdalena Prządka-Leszczyńska wrote that together with Bartosz Malewski, she had been waiting for over seven hours at the Capital City Police Headquarters for the opportunity to contact Piotr, who had been detained. She stated that the officer did not approach to talk to the lawyer, explaining that he was dealing with other matters. She asked where, in this situation, the right to defense and the standards of the rule of law were. #prawo #sprawiedliwość #obrona (translated)

RafałDlaPolski5 wrote that attorney Magda Prządka, the defender of the injured man, spoke about hindering contact with the detainee during today's police intervention and violating the right to defense. The author described this as standards under Donald Tusk's government and indicated the Republic as the source. https://t.co/pyexC8BDNh #Prawo #Obrona #Polska (translated)

Magdalena Majkowska stated that lawyer Magdalena Prządka from Ordo Iuris was at the police station on Wilcza Street in Warsaw and demanded to contact the man who had been brutally detained that day in connection with the events surrounding the Constitutional Tribunal. As Majkowska reported, the police spokesman assured that contacting the defender was not a problem, yet Prządka still could not meet with the detainee. Majkowska reminded, citing Article 245 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that the detained person is entitled to immediate contact and a direct conversation with a lawyer. #PrawaCzłowieka #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #Polska (translated)