Hagyó finally does not need to go to prison – here is the court decision - nepszava.hu

Hagyó, ex socialist Deputy Lord Mayor, was sentenced to tow-year imprisonment suspended for four years for abuse of authority and breach of fiduciary duty as inciter by the Court of Kecskemét at first instance on Tuesday. The charge of bribery, however, was dropped.

The charge against Ernő Mesterházy (ex political chief advisor of the Lord Mayor), second accused, was dropped by the judicature presiding by Ibolya Hadnagy. According to the explanation of their decision in his case only one act of incitement without result could be established.

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 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.

The Magical Nokia-box - part 6

When did BRFK start the investigation?

Although there were no condemning investigations at BKV before 2008, BRFK entered the campaign in 2010. One day after Hagyó resigned from BKV’s supervisory board Gábor Tóth police chief informed the transporting company about continuing criminal procedure. Police initiated the arrest of Szalainé 90 days prior to the elections and kept on accusing BKV persons. The investigation landed in the hands of Hagyó’s former political rival: György Pető used his position to recruit managers of some companies owned by the capital before the municipality elections, who were supposed to be informants to the police.

There were really no condemning internal investigations at BKV?

Really there were not. Two internal investigations stated in 2008 that all the contracts of the affected period are ok. Supervisory Board accepted the investigation of the Internal Supervisory Department on October 16, 2008 with respect to that those reports contained the entire advisory circle and there were no ascertainments that would have requested further steps to take. The general meeting of 2008 accepted Zsolt Tiba’s report (capital clerk) with the attachments which were reports on the contracts between BKV and AAM Zrt.

The legend of the nokia-box and the pure truth - part 5

A news came to light in the Hungarian media in March 2010 which shocked the whole country. This served the proof to the ones who criticize the Gyurcsány-government that the socialist-liberal administration is rotten to the core. This prejudice has been created successfully by the right-wing media.

Contradictions in the confessions of the accused of IV order

Before proceeding to the contradictions among the confessions of Zsolt Balogh I would like to draw the reader’s attention to an interesting event of the investigation. Before the arrest of Miklós Hagyó he indicated to the investigating authority on 11th May 2010 that he shall be at their disposal, he lives in his residency and gave all of his availabilities. In spite of this the police failed to interrogate Hagyó before his arrest of 14th May 2010.

Zsolt Balogh also offered his testimony to the investigating authority in the first half of October 2009 howver he was interrogation only in February 2010 firstly as witness and then as a suspect as stated in the letter dated on 8th April 2011 and addressed to the K.D. Marshall.

Gábor Tóth - Who managed the BKV investigation

Gábor Tóth

Who managed the BKV investigation

Gábor Tóth was born in Kalocsa, October 28, 1966. He graduated in Bólyai János Military Technical College then he completed the criminal academic expertise in the Police Officer College and ELTE Faculty of law. He started his career as a military prosecutor investigator in 1988; he served in five different districts in Budapest as a detective, deputy chief of investigation division, deputy chief of criminal division and as the chief of the police station between 1990 and 2003. He had been working as the criminal deputy chief of the Chief of Metropolitan Police of Budapest between 2003 and 2007. (The Metro Police Chief couple are expecting a baby – Vevet, 02.02.2008)

The legend of the Nokia-box and the pure truth - part 4

A news came to light in the Hungarian media in March 2010 which shocked the whole country. This served the proof to the ones who criticize the Gyurcsány-government that the socialist-liberal administration is rotten to the core. This prejudice has been created successfully by the right-wing media.

Zsolt Balogh

An internal investigation at the BKV- An unused documentary evidence

Zsolt Balogh made his statement on 24th February 2010 at a police station in connection with the II point of the indictment as follows: BKV concluded an agreement in the summer or spring of 2008 with Synergon Nyrt. being the winner in the central procurement in order to supply Microsoft software.

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.

Remarkable turn: the project director doesn’t accuse Miklós Hagyó

There has been a turn in the BKV case on the Tuesday hearing, since the leader of the Subway line 4 project company unsaid his negative statements given by him during the investigation concerning the first accused Miklós Hagyó as a result of the questions of the defense and the documentary evidences.





At the Kecskemét Tribunal the witness who was the leader of the innovation Éva H. for example stated regarding Hagyó’s press person that the way she knew that the lady worked for the former deputy lord mayor is that he talked with her about it. However the defenders presented contracts that have proven that the witness has left the project before Éva H. started to work at the City Hall.

The Indictment

Here you can view the original indictment related to the trial of Miklós Hagyó and the other associates of the Budapest Transit Company (BKV). Since the debut of the trial, the prosecution has altered the charges and other information which make up the indictment. Unfortunately, this most up-to-date version is still not available. Nevertheless, the original charges and the prosecution’s general theory can be viewed.

A Witch Hunt: Éva Horváth’s Testimony in the Light of Hagyó vs Hungary

In January of this year, followers of the trial of Miklós Hagyó and 14 associates of the Budapest Transit Company (BKV) heard the testimony from defendant #6 Éva Horváth. Her testimony is not remarkable at this moment because she withdrew previous investigation testimonies. Nearly all of the defendants have in fact withdrawn their investigation testimonies citing that their accusations where made out of fear of harsher treatment from the investigators. 



No, Horváth’s testimony is that much more interesting today because of two things: her described experience in pretrial detention in a Hungarian jail and the recent ruling from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) about Hagyó’s pretrial detention circumstances.

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/

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.