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.

November 22nd Hearing: Where There Political Motivations Behind the Accusations?

On Thursday, November 22^nd, 2012 the BKV trial continued in the Kecskemét Tribunal.  Thus far in the case, which has seen the investigation and trial of 15 suspects all of whom were associated with the Budapest Public Transport Company (BKV), the court has observed the testimonies of the first nine defendants.

On Tuesday, November 20^th, the ninth suspect, Tibor Zelenák who was BKV’s former director of public relations, provided his testimony.  Zelenák’s story sounded very similar to that of other defendants: innocent of all charges and his previously stated incriminations during 2010 interrogations were made out of fear from harsh pretrial treatment. 

According to the former director’s statements on November 20^th, he was provoked into accusing the likes of Miklós Hagyó, the primary defendant, by the interrogators, who had allegedly told Zelenák that in exchange for formal accusatory statements he could leave the interrogation and avoid pretrial detention.  The last of which did not go to plan.  Zelenák spent nearly two months in pretrial incarceration in 2010 on the preventative basis of fleeing the country.

During Thursdays hearing Miklós Hagyó, the former deputy mayor of Budapest who was the political supervisor of BKV from 2006 to 2010, supported Zelenák’s statements from earlier that week.  Hagyó also commented on the circumstances of the interrogation and the pretrial detention when he asserted that Zelenák’s rights were “sorely violated” because the news aired his arrest before Zelenák knew the process was going to take place.  Of course, that fact has many implications about the legitimacy of the process which the suspect endured.  Like Hagyó, Zelenák was restricted from contacting his family during the 51 days he was subjected to pretrial detention. 

Atilla Antal, the former CEO of BKV and the third defendant in the trial, stated that he agreed with Tuesday’s testimony from Zelenák.  He also noted that, “we just did our jobs…we achieved serious results, but now after years, some (people) say about our work that we committed crimes.”  He added: “We gave and received orders; those were our jobs…sure we made wrong decisions, but none of thought that those wrong decisions warranted jail or humiliation.  What we did at BKV still works to this day, because no one has been able to do it better.”

Antal also suggested that he noticed his name was in the computer registry of the police before he was arrested.  He asked, perhaps rhetorically, “But how did we become a criminal organization?” Answering his own question, he asserted, “[Tibor] maybe found the answer which I couldn’t.  The prosecution needed three to four people, who didn’t really know each other, and through them they would provide [evidential] support for their theories.”


Source: http://thehagyocase.wordpress.com/2012/12/31/november-22nd-hearing-where-there-political-motivations-behind-the-accusations/

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/

BKV case: or professional, either proficiency

The BKV former communication manager knew it later that he was arrested than they said this information in the news – turned out on the Tuesday’s hearing of the Hagyó case. Zelenák Tibor denied his guilt in every count and he showed other thwarting about the investigation. According to the professional communicator the indictment is just a neither „mischievous assumption”, what based on statements what the prosecution has nor professional, either proficiency for phrasings like this.

(Photo Source: www.ct4me.net)

On Tuesday the BKV case’s hearing continued with the hearing of Zelenák Tibor, IX. accused, on the Kecskemét Court. The former communication manager of the BKV maintained his investigation testimony, and he made another testimony which was added to the before one. According to the accusation, Zelenák made unneeded contracts which caused damages for the BKV, and he verified unreal achievements. The professional communicator denied his guiltiness and he said, he never made any offence ever in his life.