The Magical Nokia-box - part 21.

Why is the work of prosecution questionable?

The BKV-case is a good example of how successfully can the prosecution, the police and the court work together when the political interest requires so. One of the most important roles was performed by prosecutor Szabadváriné Dr., the chief of the Department of Special Investigation. It can be hardly considered to be correct that the first highly illegal arrests and interrogations in relation with the investigation took place with her approval – just as the fact that later she was awarded for this by Tarlós. Not to mention that the charges related to the Nokia-boxes were dealt with unexceptional attention and priority – often ignoring the related processes. The investigation in the case of the well indicated bribery was launched after Balogh unsaid his testimony. Until that time it was considered as a charge supported by one single person’s statements.

Who did initiate the prosecution in the BKV-case?

The scandal around the severance pays paid by BKV broke in 2009, not much before the parliamentary elections. The Fidesz, of course, abused the situation and they were continuously attacking the coalition leading the capital. The first charges were made by the future lord mayor as the representative of the party. István Tarlós turned to the prosecutor’s office in connection with the above mentioned severance pays on July 29, 2015.

The Magical Nokia-box - part 17

Who are the main protagonists taking advantage of the case?

György Pető leading the investigation got the lead of both FKF and FBI. Ottó Halász conducting Hagyó’s interrogation became the deputy director of the security board of FKF. Gábor Tóth currently is the supervisor of a public security working group at the Municipality of Budapest, where he can work together with more of his ex colleagues and other police higher-ups. Iván Szabó was awarded with the Order of Merit of the Republic of Hungary, Officer’s Cross, while Imre Keresztes was awarded with the Order of Merit of the Republic of Hungary, Commander’s Cross. Prosecutor, György Győri became the chief-deputy prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office in district XI and XII. Mária Szívós thrives as constitutional court judge.

So the ones who performed major roles in blackening the BKV-case were rewarded?

Exactly. Police officers, lawyers, prosecutors and judges acting according to the related political interests were awarded, despite the fact that they had committed – gently saying -“professional mistakes”.

The Magical Nokia-box - part 16

When did it turn out that the story of the Nokia-boxes is not more than a legend?

On October 9, 2012 the story took an unexpected turn: during his court hearing Zsolt Balogh unsaid his statements on the Nokia-boxes. He was called by Judge Ibolya Hadnagy to declare if he keeps his investigatory testimony. Balogh said that he keeps the one given before the court. About his significantly different investigatory testimony read out by the judge he said he had stated incriminatory things in it in order to meet the needs expressed by the prosecution and avoid prison: “I am not a hero. I did not want anything else just to go home.” Later, in March 2015 he completely withdrew the story of the Nokia-box and he apologized to Hagyó spending nine months in custody for his earlier false statements on him. Finally, the prosecution did drop the related investigation, admitting that the statements on the Nokia-box cannot be supported with evidence.

Why is it particularly significant that Balogh unsaid his testimony?

Because the whole Nokia-box scandal developed from his statements. Among others, this is how the story about the bribes delivered to Miklós Hagyó, former Deputy Lord Mayor, on several occasions by Balogh got around. The indictment of the BKV-case also based on these statements just like the two counts against Hagyó.

Péter Ottoné Szabadvári dr. - Her role in BKV-case

We do not know much of Szabadváriné’s carrier. You cannot find her CV on the internet or her exact date of birth and there is no information on her studies. The only thing which we know for sure is that she played a significant role in the BKV-case as the head of department of the Special and Economic Affairs of the Metropolitan’s Prosecutor’s Office.

She also took part in other metropolitan investigations in 2010. After this, she became one of the senior advisors of István Tarlós. However, she took this position under her husband’s family name, which seems to be logical if we take into consideration her doubtful cases.  

The Magical Nokia-box - part 7

Did the BRFK proceed correctly in the BKV case?

During the trial of the BKV case the accused claimed one by one that their testimonies  - incriminating both themselves and the other accused, primarily Hagyó – were given under coercion. Some of the accused called the procedure a show-trial, others simply described the incident as a political showdown.

Does it mean that before the court the accused and the witnesses gave different testimonies from the ones they had given to the investigators?

Yes, it does. What is more, the testimonies heard at the trial in Kecskemét are in a sharp conflict with the ones given in the investigation period. The vast majority of the main defendants and witnesses unsaid their testimonies given in the investigation period and they gave a new testimony before the court. The testimonies incriminating others were stated to have been given as a result of police threat, in exchange for their release, under humiliating circumstances, furthermore they had been given under direction and coercion.

Coercions, magisterial impositions in the Hagyó-case - SUMMARY

Gábor Tóth police superintendent during the whole investigation of the BKV case stated confidently about the process. He undertook it with name that they have the investigation in their hand and he was talking about new evidences and about conclusions what they got from the investigation testimonies.




Contrarily the testimonies which were heard in the case’s trial in Kecskemét from the defendants and from the witnesses sharply confronted with the testimonies of the concerned in the investigation period. From the main defendants and from the witnesses most of them unsaid their investigation testimonies and in the court they did a new testimony. They said about their earlier, incriminatory testimonies against others that they only did it because of police threat, in the exchange of their lives, in humiliation circumstances, it was directional and under coercion.

Ernő Mesterházy, the former advisor of Gábor Demszky on the court he offended the investigators, he called his brought to justice a recklessly violator process. He indicated that he is standing uncomprehendingly in front of the process against him which, according to him „conception, recklessly violator and it’s obligate to serve a political, human, and financial disable”. Moreover he said that according to the record the questioning was for almost 11 hours but the result was only two pages long, the investigation authorities humiliated him and tried to convince him to say an incriminatory testimony against Miklós Hagyó and if he does it than they will let him go from detention.

Coercion interrogations, magisterial malfeasances in the Hagyó case – WITNESSES (5th part) – RELOADED

In the hearings period of the BKV case, which is became called as the Hagyó case, the defendants and the witnesses in the case recalled their testimonies which was the biggest storm stirred. 

A lot of them referred to the fact that during the investigation against the Public Transportation Ltd. of Budapest and against a few former leaders of Budapest there happened several magisterial malfeasances. Ones reported about coercions, others revealed a lot of malpractices from the police during the investigation.

The police documents are bristles from the caveats. The defendants brought the attention to the court for falsely dated, lost documents and for documents which can have the forgery suspicion.




Our blog started a series for the explorations of these malfeasances. On the fifth round please get to know another case’s defendant – which known as the airport bribery- , György Sziebert’s story, observations. 

The BKV case is starting tomorrow – Népszava article

Tomorrow the BKV case is continuing with an interesting count in the Kecskemét Tribunal. The next count’s weirdness, which is connected to the BKV’s passenger informant system, that Balogh Zsolt, the former CEO of the BKV, in his testimony against Miklós Hagyó (who is the deputy lord mayor),he admitted an accounting sheet as his own when in reality he didn’t even signed it.



According to the indictment the contract with the C.C. Soft Ltd, which was about the configuration of the Local Train of Szentendre’s visual passenger informant system, made 118,8 million forints of financial disadvantage for the transportation company. In the company’s inside enquiry report in February, 2010, and in the accusation it says that the partial invoices, the efficiency certifications, and the accounting sheets which were connected to the contract was signed by Balogh. Moreover, Balogh also stated this in his testimony in March, 2010. 

A Show Trial in Hungary

image source: billofrightsinstitute.org

Before the debut of the trial of the 15 associates of the Budapest Transit Company (BKV), the prosecution team had a simple job. Their only task was to put together a case which clearly demonstrated the guilt of the 15 suspects, an alleged criminal network comprised of BKV’s upper management who were directed by a former deputy mayor of Budapest. BKV was already under public scrutiny for a severance payment scandal. Miklós Hagyó, the former deputy mayor and suspect number one, had already been publicly shamed. Popular opinion considered him a relic from the oppressive Russian past, maybe because many of the non-socialist media outlets portrayed him as such.

Shortly following the smear campaign and while awaiting the trial’s commencement, Hagyó and many other defendants spent a considerable amount of time jail. The prosecution justified this by claiming they held substantial evidence which indicated the suspects intended to flee the country. The prosecution cannot merely will someone into jail, however. A signature was therefore required to approve proposals for pretrial jail. Many suspect a woman by the name of Mária Szívós to be the authorizing judge, at least in the case of Miklós Hagyó, who arguably endured the worst treatment during nine months in pretrial jail.

The prosecution has not been able to provide ample evidence for their cause, however. The court has heard testimony after testimony, all of which revealed that the investigators coerced incriminating statements from the suspects. According to the defendants, the prosecutors and the police worked hand in hand. Many times the defendants stated that the interrogators would fax the investigative statements of the suspects directly to prosecutors during the ongoing interrogations.

For what were the investigators searching? According to the defendants, they sought evidence, authentic or fabricated, which placed Budapest Mayor Gábor Demszky and his deputy Miklós Hagyó at the forefront of an elaborate corruptions scene from which the left-wing parties greatly profited.

According to the defendants, the trial of Miklós Hagyó and the other 14 associates is a show trial – one in which the verdict is rigged because the suspects are political opponents of those in power.

Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/

The Prosecution Defends the Bigotry and Corruption

source: muttown.com

Tuesday’s hearing in the trial of the 15 associates of the Budapest Transit Company (BKV) saw an attack from the prosecution on a defendant’s testimony from the previous week.  Eva Horváth, the former BKV press officer, told the court in Kecskemét, Hungary last week that she was subjected to bigotry, threats of physical violence, and other controversial living conditions while spending three months in a Hungarian jail.  Horváth asserted that she was singled out by the guards because she never satisfied the interrogators, who allegedly attempted to coerce her into accusing Miklós Hagyó as the main perpetrator of financial crimes at BKV.

According to the prosecutor, János Homonnai, the prison guards never treated Horváth differently because she is Jewish.  Likewise, he claimed that she was never forced to consume Rivotril, a drug which is effective against epilepsy but can be used as a sedative, of which Horváth accused the prison guards.

Later in the hearing Ottó Lelovics, the fifth defendant and former communication consultant to Miklós Hagyó, presented a new calendar which was produced by BKK, the parent organization of BKV.  Although it was a bit futile, the effort was obviously an attempt to show the court that public funds are still being spent on various types of marketing strategies.  This, of course, is an attack on the prosecutions claim that BKV should not have spent on marketing and advertising campaigns because of their monopolistic position in public transportation. 

At the end of the day’s session, Prosecutor Homonnai gave a lengthy observation about the defendants’ testimonies.  According to him, the defendants have slanderously accused the interrogators of unethical coercion in addition to insulting the judicial system was claiming the trial is a show trial – a legal process that from the outset has already determined the guilt or innocence of the suspect(s).

On top of that, Homonnai defended Judge Mária Szívós, who has been under constant attack from the supporters of Miklós Hagyó and his associates.  Szívós was the signatory judge who had the final say on many of the defendants’ pretrial treatment.  That is to say, she determined if they would be placed in jail, under house arrest, etc.  Then, shortly after the current Fidesz government passed the new constitution, she was appointed to the Hungarian Constitutional Court – the supreme legal body.  Speculators have accused Fidesz and Szívós of working hand-in-hand on the BKV case, and the promotion, it has been presumed, was a reward for her track record of keeping the defendants in jail. 

Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/

Motivation to Stay Out of Hungarian Jails and the Judge’s Logic

Last Thursday’s Budapest Transit Company (BKV) hearing in Kecskemét, Hungary heard the testimony from the former BKV press officer Éva Horváth, who is the sixth defendant in the trial of 15 BKV associates.  The testimony from Horváth was a shocking recount of her experience in pretrial jail.

Horváth, who is accused of being an “instigator” in the misappropriation of BKV funds and causing financial damages to the public company which totaled 77,757,817 HUF (slightly more than $353,000.00 at the time of writing), claimed that she spent three months in Hungarian prison.  This statement sparks interest because there are no details of Horváth’s pretrial treatment listed in the indictment.

Thursday’s testimony from the former PR specialist was a shocking recount of enduring bigoted guards.  She claimed that because she is Jewish, she was subjected to weekly inspections of her cell when the inspectors would “pour garbage in the middle of her cell that included personal belongings and told [her]: ‘clean it up, Jew!’”  According to Horváth, guards also told her that if her rabbi continued to visit her they would not be able to help her from “falling out of her bed and hurting herself.”  The defendant also implied that the guards may have tried to drug her with the sedative Rivotril.  And if that wasn’t enough, she told of times when the temperature reached 130°F (59°C) in her 6×6 meter cell which housed four women.

Note to self: avoid Hungarian prison.

Horváth’s lawyer, Péter Bárándy, former minister of justice, proposed to Judge Ibolya Hadnagy the transfer of the case from the Kecskemét Tribunal to the city of Budapest.    Bárándy’s supported his proposal by referencing a December decision that some of the temporary provisions of the Hungarian constitution, dubbed the Foundational Law, were actually unconstitutional.  One of those rejected temporary provisions allowed for the case to be transferred from the courts in Budapest to Kecskemét in June 2012.

Judge Hadnagy rejected the proposal, however.  According to her, the prosecution’s appeal for a rejection of the proposal was more logical.  The case was not transferred because of the law, but in accordance with it – a law that was recently found to be unconstitutional.

Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/

Defendants Confess in BKV Trial; Balogh Confirms the Information System is Still Effective

On Tuesday, the Kecskemét Tribunal saw the return of the trial of the Budapest Transit Company (BKV).  This was the first hearing of 2013.

Of the 15 defendants in the case, Dr. Iván Miklós Horváth and Tünde Buday provided testimonies regarding a 2007 contract between BKV and Optimismo Ltd.

According to the indictment, on February 1^st, 2007 Horváth, who was a legal representative of BKV, “persuaded” former CEO Attila Antal to enter into an “unnecessary” contractual agreement with Optimismo.  The contracted work worth 19,200,000.00 HUF involved technical inspection of BKV’s photocopiers.

The prosecution claims that no work was ever completed according to the terms of the contract.  Instead, the agreement actually offered the financial means to fulfill an unofficial “severance” agreement between BKV and its former CEO Aba Botond.

Buday, who was the owner of Optimismo, stated in court that she never assisted in the contracted work.  Another employ obliged to the contracted terms, and then Buday paid the employ from the 19.2 million forint.

In a previous hearing, Attila Antal admitted his guilt in relation to the Optimismo contract.  According to him, the contracted work was never fulfilled.

Buday, who is accused of document forgery for signing the contract completion report, denied her guilt in addition to an accusation of complicity in misappropriation of funds.

Horváth did not offer any additions to his investigation testimony.  Instead, he objected to the wording of the formal indictment.  In Horváth’s opinion, the accusations made against him are too vague and responding to them is “impossible.”  He added that the crimes of which he is accused occurred while he was abroad.  He confirmed this statement by providing his passport to the court.

At the end of the hearing, Zsolt Balogh, the fourth defendant in the case, provided photos for the court which displayed the controversial passenger information system still in operation.

Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com

BKV case: The prosecution took on (in a rejected way) the „Jewish sayings”

BKV case: The prosecution and the "ungroovies" defendants

After the hearings of the BKV’s defendants the prosecution rejected the statements which were about the coercions and that this is a concept trial. Homonnai János prosecutor defended long against the „Jewish sayings” (in Hungarian we have a word „zsidózás” which means that they used the Jewish word as a bad word, as a discrimination) and against the drugging of H. Éva, but these charges weren’t against them, they were against the guards in the jail.

The hearing started with the reading of the – partly renounced – testimony of H. Éva. The former press person of Hagyó partly renounced her testimony in Kecskemét, which she said after her arrest. The reason of that is because H. Éva said, for that testimony she said those things because she was separated from her family, they asked questions which were directed and it was under coercion.

H. Éva spent half a year in pretrial detention, during this time according to her report the investigators continually and directly told her to make confessions against Hagyó Miklós and Puch László, but she couldn’t satisfied their request in an „established and proved (with evidences) way”, ever so she wanted to see her family so much.

After the reading of H. Éva’s investigation testimony a few defendant observed that. They said that from H. Éva’s testimony in court and her not renounced testimony it’s clear that the press person did her job in the reality at the BKV and she didn’t give any order in the name of Hagyó Miklós to the leaders of the BKV. Lelovics Ottó the former professional communication person of Hagyó Miklós showed to the court a BKK’s calendar of 2013 with he wanted to prove that these kinds of outlays are attendant for the normal functioning during this day and it doesn’t counts as a crime.

                          

(Source: stand-up-hirek.blog.hu)

In the end of the hearing the prosecution made an unusual long, a before wrote observation in general for the defendants testimonies about the coercions. Homonnai János prosecution said that they just cannot say anything of the accusations about the coercions, concept process, and humiliation and against the investigation. He noted that the defendants has right to tell them the penalty what they had in the process but there is no connection in the proof what they lived through. Homonnai János in wondrously mentioned the part of H. Éva’s testimony where she is talking about that they drugged her, they refused from her the breakfast because of her religion and also they told her to „clean it Jewish!” when they throw her personal stuff mixed with trash. However these charges in every count were against the employees in the jail from the part of H. Éva, the prosecution rejected in their own name the accusations of the „reminiscent of the 50’s”. The prosecution also rejected that they made coercions, however Homonnai added that because a process like this is kind of coercion than the people can live it like this without routine.

The prosecutor in his speech defended Szívós Mária, Constitutional Judge. He said that in the case of the defendants, 30 judges decided about coercion provision, so to say that because of this Szívós Mária was elected as a Constitutional Judge is absurd. Homonnai didn’t say anything that Szívós Mária was the one who (in the case of a few defendants) aggravation and uphold the coercion provisions, moreover, she brought a few defendants back to jail after months of their testimonies.

Source: http://www.nepszava.hu/articles/article.php?id=616184

Original:

BKV-per: az ügyészség és a "rutintalan" vádlottak

A BKV-vádlottak meghallgatásának végeztével az ügyészség visszautasította a nyomozást ért, kényszervallatást és koncepciós eljárást emlegető vallomásokban foglaltakat. Homonnai János ügyész elsősorban a zsidózás és H. Éva begyógyszerezése miatt védekezett hosszan, ám ezen vádak nem nekik, hanem a börtönőröknek szóltak.

A tárgyalás H. Éva – részben visszavont – nyomozati vallomásainak felolvasásával kezdődött. Hagyó egykori sajtósa azon vallomásait vonta vissza Kecskeméten, amelyek megtételére már letartóztatása után került sor. Ennek okát H. Éva több vádlotthoz hasonlóan úgy indokolta, hogy azok megtételére családjától elszakítva, irányított kérdések feltételével, kényszervallatás során került sor.

H. Éva fél évet töltött előzetes letartóztatásban, ez idő alatt saját beszámolója szerint a nyomozók folyamatosan, irányítottan kértek terhelő vallomást Hagyó Miklósra és Puch Lászlóra, de kérésüknek „megalapozottan és bizonyítékokkal alátámasztható módon” nem tudott eleget tenni, bármennyire is szerette volna viszontlátni családját.

H. Éva nyomozati vallomásainak felolvasása után több vádlott észrevételezte az elhangzottakat. Jelezték, H. Éva bíróság előtt tett, ill. vissza nem vont nyomozati vallomásaiból is kitűnik, hogy a sajtós ténylegesen elvégezte munkáját a BKV-nál, és nem adott utasítást Hagyó Miklós nevében a közlekedési cég vezetőinek. Lelovics Ottó, Hagyó Miklós egykori kommunikációs szakembere bemutatott a bíróságnak egy 2013-as BKK-s naptárat is, amellyel azt kívánta bizonyítani, hogy ezek a jellegű kiadások a mai napig a normális működés velejárói, nem bűncselekmények.

                              

(Forrás: stand-up-hirek.blog.hu)

A tárgyalás végén az ügyészség szokatlanul hosszú, előre megírt, általános észrevételt tett a vádlottak kényszervallatásokról szóló, egybehangzó beszámolóira. Homonnai János ügyész elmondta, hogy a koncepciós eljárást, kényszervallatást, megaláztatásokat emlegető, nyomozást illető vádakat nem hagyhatják szó nélkül. Megjegyezte, hogy a vádlottaknak joguk van beszámolni az őket ért, az eljárásból fakadó hátrányokról, de annak a bizonyításhoz nincs köze, hogy mit éltek át. Homonnai János meglepő módon többször felemlegette H. Éva vallomásának azon részét, amelyben arról beszélt, hogy a börtönben tudtán kívül begyógyszerezték, vallása miatt megtagadták tőle a reggelit, ill. azt mondták neki, hogy „takaríts zsidó”, mikor személyes tárgyait szeméttel összekeverve elé szórták. Bár ezek a vádak minden esetben a börtönben dolgozókat érték H. Éva részéről, az ügyészség saját nevében utasította vissza az „50-es éveket idéző” vádakat. A vádhatóság azt is visszautasította, hogy kényszervallattak volna, bár azt Homonnai hozzátette, mivel egy ilyen eljárás kényszerítő jellegű, rutintalanul így is meg lehet élni azt.

Az ügyész beszédében védelmébe vette Szívós Mária alkotmánybírót is. Elmondta, hogy a vádlottak esetében közel 30 bíró hozott döntést kényszerintézkedésekről, így azt állítani, hogy emiatt nevezték ki alkotmánybírónak Szívóst, abszurd dolog. Homonnai arra nem tért ki, hogy Szívós Mária volt az, aki több vádlott esetében szigorította és tartotta fenn a szigorúbb kényszerintézkedést, sőt, több vádlottat a nyomozás későbbi szakaszában, hónapokkal a vallomástételük után vitetett vissza a börtönbe.

BKV case: „Jewish, clean it up!”

BKV case: „Jewish, clean it up!”

The BKV case continued with the hearing of H. Éva defendant, former press person of Hagyó Miklós on the Kecskemét Court. H. Éva denied her guiltiness in every count. According to the prosecution, H. Éva is accused with the charge of ordering unneeded BKV contracts, and according to the indictment she got her salary without actual work. On the hearing H. Éva listed long why the accusation against her is absurd. Besides, they accused her in dates in a few times when H. Éva didn’t even work with Hagyó Miklós, moreover according to the prosecution she ordered people in the name of Hagyó whom knew the politician long before she know him.

H. Éva reported in details about the circumstances of her arrest and her pretrial detention. She reminded that months after her incrimination she was arrested the same time as Hagyó Miklós and her pretrial detention was ordered by Szívós Mária, who now is the main Constitutional Court judge.

„Then the pretrial detention came, and because of my religion they made station house/pen/lockup check in every week”- said it brokenly H. Éva in front of the court. „They made comments on my books, they spilt rubbish on the middle of my pen’s floor, mix it with my personal stuffs, for „Jewish, clean it up””. They said that if the rabbi is coming to visit her henceforward, within the legal facilities, they cannot protect me from "falling down" from by bed and hurt myself, but I still undertake my religion/belief. 

                                

(Source: hirado.hu) 

"The jail doctors tried to - without my knowledge - make me take drugs. They started to give me Rivotril medicine that I didn't know about, I didn't require any narcotized, drugs, and moreover I objected it on big tone when they offered me. I saw how the people look like there whom they redundantize (make her go down physically and spiritually), I wanted to get back to my family with clean/undamaged mind. It happened that there was 54 Celsius in the pen which was 6m² which was for 4 people and they closed the only recess which could have give us air, the recess what they used for giving them food and I could list more. „- said the former press person of Hagyó.

"For questioning they took me in handcuffs and fetter, like they did it with the murderers- and without treat"- it made wounds on my body. Because of the unduly tight delimitation in my movement, I was falling and getting up all the time during the transport. One time they even had to take me to the causality surgery because I hit my head into the curbside during the falling in fetter. When I brought it up to the guardian who walked with me he said that I have to shut up, because if I don’t he will see this like she attacked him and then he can legally shoot her. I want to note that I never had to be afraid from the people in pretrial detention or from the prisoners. During this I lost 26 kg - she said. 

H. Éva in her  testimony gave an explanation of her renounced investigation testimony: "when we arrived into the official room at the prosecution, then I told while I was crying to the controller of the investigation – former leader – that I want to go home to my son, to my family, I want to see my kid after 4 months. However, believe me, I really cannot say anything against Hagyó Miklós what I can support with evidence, or it would be true. For this, one of the investigators from the BRFK (Headquarter Police Station of Budapest) whom they got loan from their organization to the main prosecution for the further investigation process, he said that then she can go back and they will meet on the 6months meeting. For this I started to cry even more, then the prosecutor who was there asked me, if I cannot say anything against Hagyó then do I know Puch László? As they know I know him. I said yes, I know him, but how is he related to the BKV case? They said he is not, but they interested in him, if I tell everything what I know about him then it’s enough for them and then I can go home to my family."

For the ending of her testimony H. Éva read out loud a letter what was his father’s last letter what he sent him to her while she was in jail, since that her father died in a heart attack. A few defendant and their lawyers heard this letter out with crying. The judge before the again continuance of the hearing said that she should be aware of the circumstances for the false accusation – referred to the description about her coercion – however the former press person of Hagyó maintained what she said earlier. The BKV case is continuing with the review of H. Éva’s – partly renounced – investigation testimony on the Kecskemét Court.

Source: http://www.nepszava.hu/articles/article.php?id=614879

Original:

BKV-per: „Takaríts, zsidó”

H. Éva vádlottnak, Hagyó Miklós egykori sajtósának vallomástételével folytatódott a BKV-per tárgyalása csütörtökön, a Kecskeméti Törvényszéken. H. Éva tagadta bűnösségét minden vádpontban. H. Évát több, az ügyészség szerint szükségtelen BKV-s szerződés megkötésére való utasítás adásával vádolják, ill. a vádirat szerint a sajtós valós munkavégzés nélkül vette fel fizetését. A tárgyaláson H. Éva hosszan sorolta, hogy miért képtelenség az ellene felhozott vád. Egyebek mellett olyan időpontokat jelöltek meg több esetben, amikor H. Éva még együtt sem dolgozott Hagyó Miklóssal, illetve az ügyészség szerint olyan embereknek adott utasításokat Hagyó nevében, akik nála jóval régebb óta ismerték a politikust.

H. Éva részletesen beszámolt őrizetbe vétele és előzetes letartóztatása körülményeiről. Emlékeztetett rá, hogy meggyanúsítása után hónapokkal, Hagyó Miklóssal egy időben vették őrizetbe, és előzetes letartóztatását az azóta alkotmánybíróvá emelt Szívós Mária rendelte el.

„Aztán jött az előzetes letartóztatás, ami alatt vallásom miatt hetente tartottak zárka ellenőrzést” – mondta megtörten H. Éva a bíróság előtt. „Megjegyzéseket tettek a könyveimre, öntötték a szemetet a zárka közepére, belekeverve a személyes dolgaimat, hogy „takaríts zsidó”. Mondták, hogy ha továbbra is bejön hozzám a rabbi, a törvényes lehetőségeken belül, nem tudnak esetleg megóvni attól, hogy „leesek” az ágyról és megüssem magam, de mégis vállaltam a hitemet.”

                                

(Forrás: hirado.hu)

„A börtönorvosok próbáltak – a tudtom nélkül – bekábítószerezni. Hiszen úgy kezdtek el adagolni Rivotril gyógyszert, hogy arról nem tudtam, nem igényeltem semmilyen bódító, kábító gyógyszert, sőt hangsúlyosan elleneztem, amikor felajánlották. Láttam, hogy néznek ki azok, akiket leszedáltak ott, én ép elmével szerettem volna hazakerülni a családomhoz. Előfordult, hogy 54 C fok volt a 4 fős 6 m2-es zárkában, ránk csukták az egyetlen levegőt szolgáltató nyílást, az étkezéshez használt kisablakot a zárkaajtón és még sorolhatnám tovább.” – fogalmazott Hagyó egykori sajtósa.

„Kihallgatásokra teljes bilincsben vittek, mint a gyilkosokat ezzel tályogos – és kezeletlen - sebeket okozva a testemet. Mozgásom indokolatlanul szoros korlátozása miatt, estem - keltem a szállítások közben. Egy alkalommal annyira, hogy baleseti sebészetre is kiszállítottak, mert a járdaszegélybe vertem be a fejemet esés közben a lábbilincsben. Amikor ezt szóvá tettem a kísérő BV őrnek, akkor azt válaszolta kussoljak, mert úgy veszi megtámadtam és akkor törvényesen rám is lőhet.) Szeretném itt megjegyezni, hogy sosem az elítéltektől és az előzetes letartoztatásban lévő raboktól kellett tartanom. Ez alatt 26 kilót fogytam.” – mondta.

H. Éva vallomásában korábbi, nyomozati szakban tett, majd később visszavont állításaira is magyarázatot adott: „Amikor megjelentünk a kihallgató szobában az ügyészségen, akkor a nyomozást felügyelő – korábban vezető – ügyésznek sírva mondtam, hogy haza akarok menni a fiamhoz a családomhoz, látni szeretném közel 4 hónap után a gyerekemet. Viszont higgyék el, hogy tényleg nem tudok Hagyó Miklósra olyan terhelő vallomást tenni, amit bizonyítékokkal alá is tudnék támasztani, vagy ténylegesen igaz is lenne. Azt mondta erre, ha jól emlékszem a BRFK-s nyomozók egyike, akiket kölcsön adott a saját szervezetük a KNY Főügyészségnek a további nyomozás ellátáshoz, hogy akkor mehetek vissza és majd a 6 hónaposon találkozzunk. Erre még jobban sírtam, majd az ott jelenlévő ügyész megkérdezte, ha nem tudok Hagyóról, akkor ismerem –e Puch Lászlót? Ők úgy tudják igen. Mondtam ismerem igen, de ő hogy jön a BKV-s ügyhöz? Azt mondták sehogy, de Őket érdekli, ha mindent elmondok, amit tudok róla és az elegendő lesz számunkra, akkor hazamehetek a családomhoz.”

A vallomás zárásaként H. Éva felolvasta azóta szívbetegségben elhunyt édesapjától, a börtönben kapott utolsó levelét. Ezt a vádlottak és védőik egy része sírva hallgatta végig. A bírónő a tárgyalás elnapolása előtt ismét jelezte, hogy a hamis vád – utalva a kényszervallatás leírására – bűncselekményének következményeire legyen tekintettel, ám Hagyó egykori sajtósa fenntartotta az elmondottakat. A BKV-per a jövő héten H. Éva – részben visszavont – nyomozati vallomásainak ismertetésével folytatódik a Kecskeméti Törvényszéken. 

November 20th Hearing: ‘No Experts, No Expertise’ Says the Ninth Defendant

The trial of the Budapest Public Transport Company (BKV) continued on Tuesday, November 20^th, 2012 in the city of Kecsemét, Hungary.  The hearing presented the testimony of the previously unheard ninth defendant, Tibor Zelenák, who held various upper level management positions in BKV communications and PR departments.  Zelenák has denied any criminal activity on his part.

 Like all of the already heard defendants, he stated that the evidence against him and many of the other 14 defendants has been “mischievously” created to suit the prosecutions predetermined culprits.  The former BKV public relations director also asserted that the prosecution has neither sought the advice from experts nor displayed any expertise on the charges at hand.

According to the indictment Zelenák created unnecessary contracts which were not in the best interests of the public transportation company, but instead where most profitable for his political supervisor, Miklós Hagyó, his upper management colleagues, or himself.  Furthermore, he is charged with falsification of documents related to certifications of achievements between BKV and contracted companies.  In other words, he allegedly approved or directly signed documents which certified the completion of work (and therefore fulfillment of contractual obligations) but the work was allegedly never completed.  In the eyes of the prosecution, the representatives of the State, this was frivolous spending and adding to the already indebted public company.

The former director of public relations presented himself in the courtroom as a simple, hard-working father of three children whose life has been completed transformed since the eruption of the accusations.  Zelenák spent nearly two months in pretrial detention during 2010, about which he described to the Tribunal.

According to Zelenák, he was put into a cell with a group of “big, violent recidivists” but he was eventually relocated because of a bedbug problem.

The defendant also stated that in his opinion the basis of his pretrial detention, to prevent him from fleeing the country before the trial, was ill-founded.  According to him, the probability of him absconding was “negligible” since he has a family and he had made himself available to investigators for the four months prior to his pretrial detention. 

In reference to BKV’s promotional strategy under the political supervision of Miklós Hagyó and then mayor of Budapest Gábor Demszky, Zelenák stated that BKV’s strategy was no different than the parent company, BKK. 

The Center for Budapest Transportation (BKK) has also been drawn into the hearing discussions, particularly their practice of freely distributing merchandise which was a strategic marketing ploy.  The controversy herein lies in the fact that the BKV representative under trial never practiced such marketing campaigns. 

Zelenák finished his testimony by saying that the interrogators told him in the 2010 investigations that “there is a way for agreement and then he can go back to his family earlier,” but according to him, he did not respond.  He elaborated on the experience by saying that he asked the police if he could call his wife because he did not want her to know about his arrest from the news.  Zelenák then claimed that the police answered with, “stay calm, your arrest was already in the 4pm news.”  According to Zelenák, the only person who did not know about his arrest was him.

The public relations expert said that after his release from pretrial detention he no longer wanted to seek employment in this field.  Instead, he relocated to Switzerland to work as a gardener.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/31/november-20th-hearing-no-experts-no-expertise-says-the-ninth-defendant/

November 13th Hearing: Another Visit to the Testimony from Regőczi

On Tuesday, November 13^th, 2012 the trial of the Budapest Public Transport Company (BKV) continued in the city of Kecskemét, Hungary.  Miklós Hagyó, the primary defendant amongst the 15 accused, gave his thoughts on the testimony of Miklós Regőczi, BKV’s former deputy CEO of sales and communication.

Regőczi, who is accused of acting in a criminal organization which was allegedly led by Hagyó, stated in his testimony that the charges have been trumped up and the evidence provided to support the charges against Miklós Hagyó was falsely stated under controversial interrogations.  Regőczi also defended the contracts signed with companies such as Pont Ez Ltd. and WELL Advertising and PR Agency Ltd. noting that other publicly owned companies had executed much larger PR and marketing contracts, but those companies have never been scrutinized. 

According to the indictment, these companies were contracted to “improve the public image” of the public transport company, but the prosecution asserts that since BKV hold a monopoly in the public transport sector there was no need for such contracts and prodigal business. 

Regőczi also renounced previously made claims that Miklós Hagyó, the deputy mayor of Budapest and political supervisor of BKV from 2006 to 2010, never ordered him to affect contracts. 

Hagyó, in accordance with him being charged of running BKV as a criminal organization, is accused of forcing contracts with companies that were not operating in BKV’s best interest, but instead were politically or personally profitable for him.

The former deputy mayor recalled during the hearing on November 13^th that many other individuals were ordering the creation of contracts, but not him.  He listed György Tóthfalusi, a former SZDSZ representative, along with Ferenc Olti and Gábor Dancs.  “Neither me nor my colleagues had no right to give orders to the administration,” repeated Hagyó.

He also noted that even though these men oversaw the business between BKV and other contractors, none of them are suspects nor have they been witnesses during the trial.  “Though I’m of the persuasion that my political colleagues acted legally, their names appeared in the records as people who gave orders to the upper management of BKV, yet there is no investigation into their actions,” asserted the former deputy mayor.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/30/november-13th-hearing-another-visit-to-the-testimony-from-regoczi/

November 8th Hearing: Defendants Respond to Regőczi’s Testimony

On Thursday, November 8^th, 2012 the previously stated testimony from the former BKV deputy CEO of communication and sales Miklós Regőczi was the hot topic in the Keckemét Tribunal. 

Regőczi was the first to speak during the hearing.  He continued to support the controversial marketing contracts which were previously deemed prodigal.  He defended the BKV marketing campaign which occurred under his supervision from 2007 until 2008 by list annual marketing expenditures from other public companies, notably the national railway system MÁV Ltd. which previously signed contracts worth nearly 1 billion forint. 

Regőczi, like many of the other defendants, partially renounced his previous accusations against the other defendants, saying that he was coerced into the accusations by the temptation to “go home” the night of interrogation.  Otherwise, it was implied, Regőczi would have endured a harsher interrogation.

Other defendants such as Ernő Mesterházy, political adviser to the former mayor of Budapest, and Atilla Antal, former CEO of the Budapest Public Transport Company, collectively agreed that the circumstances of their and Regőczi’s interrogations should be formally investigated. 

Miklós Hagyó and Zsolt Balogh, two of the main suspects in the case who did not speak at the hearing, both expressed experiencing similar duress during their interrogations.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/november-8th-hearing-defendants-respond-to-regoczis-testimony/

November 6th, 2012: The Hearing of the Eighth Defendant, Miklós Regőczi

The prosecution has attempted to create the evidence which supported their prematurely determined accusations against Miklós Hagyó – at least that is what the testimony from the former deputy CEO of communication and sales at the Budapest Public Transportation Company (BKV) Miklós Regőczi claimed in his testimony to the Kecskemét Tribunal.  He presented documents that, according to him, provided evidence to support his theory. 

The documents in question seemed to explain that there is currently confusion about the legality of the contracts between BKV and other companies like Synergon and CCSoft.  The confusion is rooted in the transition of governments and the variance in regulations that comes with administration change.  In other words, the structure and value of the contracts, for example between CCSoft and BKV, may not have been legal under more regulatory regimes, but now they are. 

Regőczi went on to further slam the credibility of the BKV case by saying that it has been “political payoff” and a “show trial.”  The former deputy CEO stated that from 2007 to 2008 the upper management of BKV “saved 9 billion (forints)” which has been noted in the formal indictment.  He then continued, “Before (us), it disappeared into the politicians’ pockets, so in this way we affronted many interests by working more transparently.”

Regőczi stood by the other defendants and his former colleagues while particularly supporting Miklós Hagyó, who  never ordered or forced any employees to sign conspicuous contracts, claimed the defendant. 

Regarding the contracts, the former deputy CEO of communication discussed in detail the controversy behind the BKV’s marketing expenses and campaign between 2007 and 2008.  Regőczi stated that he didn’t understand the accusations and problems since other publicly owned companies such as MÁV Ltd., Hungary’s national railway system, had in the recent past signed marketing contracts worth 855 million forints.

Towards the end of the testimony, Regőczi provided a somewhat awkward account of an exchange which he had with police officers.  According to the defendant, he was told by unspecified officers that the progression of the BKV investigation and trial has been “unprofessional.”  Regőczi alluded to his previous theory that the culprits were determined first, then the appropriate evidence was presented, and the investigators have withheld evidence which has not been “good within the picture.” Furthermore, the former BKV leader considered it strange that the indictment included 25 companies which had suspect relations with the public transport company, yet only three of the companies have representatives involved in the trial.

Regőczi concluded his testimony by saying that the interrogators had continuously faxed his statements to the prosecution during the interrogation, which also strangely occurred during the interrogation of the third defendant, Atilla Antal.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/november-6th-2012-the-hearing-of-the-eighth-defendant-miklos-regoczi/

October 30th, 2012: More Interrogation Controversy

The BKV hearing on the Tuesday, October 30^th, 2012 presented the testimony from Ottó Lelovics, the former campaign manager and public relations specialist to main defendant Miklós Hagyó. 

Lelovics’ testimony has been rather consistent with those given by the other defendants: he was subjected to threats of harsher treatment from the interrogators unless he provided appropriately placed accusations.

Also like the other suspects Lelovics pleaded innocent of forcing any BKV employee to sign feckless contracts.  In fact, according to the former campaign manager he was never employed by BKV nor any other public company and he committed no crimes, unless you count the three unregistered bullets in his home which were discovered by police when they searched his home.  Accounting for those, he said that they were encased in remembrance of a deceased hunter.   

During the hearing Lelovics recalled how he was contacted while at his parents’ vacation home by a phone call from the investigators.  Thereafter he was to make his way to meeting with the police where he was subjected to his first questioning.  According to the fifth defendant, the police searched his home and then left, but only after an eerie comment was made by one of the officers.  “Take a lot of stuff because you’ll be in for a long time,” is what Lelovics said he heard. 

Months later, the suspect was required to undergo another period of interrogation, but he said this time the environment and circumstances were much more intimidating.  Lelovics claimed, “In the center of the city during broad daylight they handcuffed me, they leased me, and we were standing there for an hour.”

After this, the former public relations specialist was placed in pretrial detention where he remained for another six months.

Similarly to the primary defendant, Miklós Hagyó, Lelovics arrived in court with BKK merchandise.  While showing the court the items which included playing cards, bags, and pens, Lelovics inquired to the court to consider the necessity of producing such marketing material when BKK and BKV have a monopolistic hold on the public transportation industry.  Like Hagyó, Lelovics demanded to know how could contracts with companies which were improving the technology of the public transport be considered wasteful spending when one considers the incurred cost of producing the marketing merchandise.

Lelovics concluded his testimony by providing a quote from the former mayor of Budapest Demszky Gábor: “It was a composed and planned series, which was made for a political purpose and they have achieved that purpose.  I think it’s unforgivable, that they mired dozens of people and they suspected them and they have denigrated them.


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/october-30th-2012-more-interrogation-controversy/