The daily blather…
Got to talking to Tatyana last night about the sorts of things I should write about here. It is not like I don’t have anything to say. This is not the case. In fact the truth is that there is too much to write about and I am becoming afraid that I might forget some of the things I want to put in here. Here is a few of the things that have crossed the desk as ideas: I had planned on another group of scenarios about what might transpire at this next upper court hearing. I also thought a few more introspective pieces about what it feels like to be amidst all of this.
But then, I could also write about what our life is like economically, right now. What we have to do to get by. That would be interesting to people I think.
But then I thought that I might like to let other people speak here. I thought of my friend Uladsimir from the Viasna human rights association in Brest. He could contribute a column here as well. Of course of I did that, my friend Drazek also works for an NGO help organization in Poland. He could also write something about what they are doing here. And of course there is amnesty international and/or any organizations that deal with police or judicial corruption. They would have a lot to say. The Helsinki foundation which insofar as its polish business is concerned, is directly related to the problems of the Polish courts, which are well known to be the slowest in all of Europe.
And then I could start posting some of the stories that I wrote that preceded the writing of the book, my correspondences, excerpts from the book, some more things about the plays and playwriting. Hell, I could even say some things about cultural bias and reading Hemingway in Russian.
A better way to say this is that I have too much that I want to say and the subject matter starts to get away from me a little. I suppose it is always good to remember what you were talking about in the first place. Having a plan always makes things easier. And, I feel I know pretty much what that is about. I mean I think I do…
Let’s see: About two years ago I went for a visit to my grandmother’s home town, a place I had visited before, in the hopes of finding some old friends and seeing how they were getting along. While there I met a lady I liked, started a relationship with her and had the idea to make a little local business in my chosen field so as to support that relationship. I was in Warsaw for a week to get a new visa and to arrange a small loan. On my last day in town, while I was looking for a movie theatre to kill some time while waiting for my train, a guy drove his car into me and pinned me with it to a bus. I took offence to this attempt on my life and punched the guy in the mouth. When he responded oddly to the situation-he did not apologize and he did not continue the assault- I felt there was something wrong with the situation and went to the police to ask them to remove this man from my life; I felt he was attacking me personally. Well, it turns out that this guy was an off duty cop, and because of that, the police decided to believe his story, which was that I arbitrarily attacked him and his car because I was completely deranged at not being able to handle a traffic situation.
His being a cop also relieved him of the same sorts of burdens any private citizen might have to be a ware of such as collecting witnesses or making proper documentation for his claims. He was even allowed to leave the scene without reprimand. There were no drug or alcohol tests on either of us.
They locked me in a cell and sent him home.
The case went before a public prosecutor. He made an interview with me. I told my story. It did not match the cops. The cop had created a story about an alternative traffic situation. Interestingly enough though, when the cop had told his story to the arresting officer, his story was quite a bit like mine. The prosecutor ignored this. He also ignored the lack of witnesses, that the fingerprints did not match and that the story does not really go with people’s sense of reality; things like this do not really take place in broad daylight in the middle of the city in front of witnesses.
However when I refused to admit guilt, the prosecutor arraigned the case anyway. The judge, though to my face offered bail allowing me to get back to my friends and business aspirations, after I left, she changed the situation to a perpetual holding of my passport so as to insure I could not leave the country.
I was not told of what was said to me or permitted to see any of the documents in the case for six weeks. Nor was a appointed a lawyer in that time. When I finally did see the case, I was astounded at what flimsy a story had kept me there. I urged that the cop was lying about the whole story, and the proof of that could easily bee seen in that the damages to his car were old. Regardless of these complaints (or in spite of them), during a meeting at that time, the prosecutor both told me that the cop was going to shoot me, as well as complaining to me about the sorts of wages a public prosecutor made. The case was continued for another six weeks.
At that time, another meeting was held and the cop turned in his first “official” damage report. This report however, made five weeks after our incident, contained damages that were not listed in the police account of the car. Of course, even this made no impression on the prosecutor or the case.
Based only on this evidence, the case was sent to the courts.
Hoping the judge would be less predisposed to lies and corruption than the prosecutor, I wrote a 92 page report detailing the lies told in the case and proving with the help of the police photos of the car that there were in fact preexisting damages to the car. This however was not to be. The trial itself was exactly as biased and one sides as the prosecution. It lasted six months and came to an end with as contrived a verdict, as had been the whole of the experience.
When I was finally let out of Poland, I had lost all of the money that was to be spent on the relationship and the business. I was also more than $10,000 in debt. The woman with whom I had started he relationship, amazingly enough was still with my by this time. I stayed with her and have been doing what I can to try and find a way to replace the money stolen by Poland and do the business here I said I would so ever since.
To this end, I wrote a book about the event (Being Had) and eventually put together this website that you are looking at right now.
However, it should also be said that amazingly enough the situation I have just outlined for you is still going on. Only two weeks ago, some eight months after writing the appeal against the decision, the court has only just now agreed to meet and speak about the case. That court date in February 10th in Warsaw.
At this time I am yet debating if I will attend.
And that was what I could come up with for today. Heard this all before? I have. Is it getting any clearer?
Back to HOMEPAGE