I have received some emails about what has been posted on the blog this week, both my postings and the letter I have sent to Komendant Gawlik, so as promised I will answer the points raised by your emails. I will not identify the full name of those of you who wrote to me, but I am very grateful that you took the time to email me, and am happy to answer as fully as possible. In this post I will answer the first point that some of you wrote to me in your emails.
The first question that has been put to me, is why I asked Komendant Gawlik to reply to me within 7 days. This is answered quite simply. Firstly, I wrote the letter in order to provide Komendant Gawlik with an opportunity to answer me directly, which was done as a courtesy to him, nothing more. I hope to avoid a long , drawn out criminal investigation into what happened at Piotrs' post-mortem, and why it happened, so wrote to Komendant Gawlik.
In Poland, both the Police and Prosecution service have, by Law, 30 days to reply to a letter such as I sent to Kom. Gawlik.
Unfortunately, it has been my (and many others) sad experience that both the Police and Prosecution Service interpret this law, not as being a legal duty to answer within 30 days, rather they interpret it as a licence NOT to answer before the 29th or 30th day.
In any other job or profession, if 30 days elapsed from receiving a letter, to when it was replied to, the world would come to a grinding halt!
Secondly, the violations of law and procedure by Officers' under Komendant Gawliks' authority referred to in my letter, are not the first time I have suffered such abuses of law by the Police in Poland.
If Komendant Gawlik is too busy, or has more important issues to deal with, and therefore cannot speak with 2 of his officers (Ins. Prokipczak and NadK. Tybor), whose workplaces are within 10 metres of his own office, in less than 7 days, to establish the facts of what occurred in March 2009 regarding my dead son Piotrs' post-mortem, then clearly I must respect his prioritisation.
He is the most Senior Police Officer in the Gorlice area, an area of some 70 square km. Komendant Gawlik has many years of Police management experience, Komendant Gawlik has many years of legal and police training to call on. Komendant Gawlik has the resources of the entire Polish State at his disposal. I am just the father of a baby son who died violently, who died in no way a natural death*, I am just an ordinary man fighting for Justice for my dead son and for myself. If these unlimited resources do not, within 7 days, permit Komendant Gawlik to ask Ins. Prokipczak "why did you unlawfully attend a post-mortem?", and the other extremely sreious questions I raised in my letter, then that is , frankly, unbelievable, and gives the impression, certainly to me, that Komendant Gawlik has real difficulties in answering my letter. If my letter is indeed in any way difficult to answer for Komendant Gawlik, then that will, I believe, only be because of violations of Law, procedure and sworn duty of officers under his direct command.
I have to explain that, under Polish Law, Komendant Gawlik is not doing me a favour by answering my letter, Komendant Gawlik is not doing me a service by answering my letter, Komendant Gawlik is not doing something special by answering my letter. Komendant Gawlik in fact , under Polish Law, is not entitled to ignore my letter, quite the opposite in fact- he is legally obliged to answer my letter, and in full. In the most simple terms, it is his sworn duty to answer my letter, and every question contained therein, in full. It is this Legal situation which entitles every crime victim in Poland to hold the Police to account for their actions. A truly democratic legal situation.
So in sending this letter to Komendant Gawlik, I was not being rude, or ignorant, or doing anything that any crime victim in Poland cannot do, and indeed crime victims in Poland do exactly the same every day.
So at the risk of repeating myself, Komandant Gawlik must answer my letter, in full.
And Truthfully.
I also want to say (because I was asked in one of the emails I received) that in matters of Law, both criminal and commercial, it is not unusual to inform the recipient of a letter such as I sent to Komendant Gawlik, that a time for response is included. It is not included as an attempt to be either rude or disrespectful to the recipient, rather it points out that the situation is such that either a response is received or further legal action will occur. I think we have all heard of situations where a company sends a computerised letter for payment to a client, with just such a 7 day limit included, or a commercial offer is made that is only available for 7 days..
If Komendant Gawlik, having been informed that a 7 day limit exists, chooses not to answer, that is , absolutely, his choice and his decision. A choice , a decision I will respect unreservedly.
Just as I am sure he respects my choices, my decisons, and my Legal rights.
Unlike his Officers' during the post-mortem following Piotrs' death.
I, after 4 years and 5 months of obstruction, abuse, and admitted Prosecutorial misconduct**, am not concerned with Police manipulation of procedure for their own purposes in this situation, I am only interested about getting to the truth, and obtaining Justice for Piotr , and for myself.
I hope this answers your questions about how I wrote my letter, in English, and its translation to Polish. In my next post I will answer the other question that quite a few of you asked in your emails.
Thank you all for your support of this and my other blogs, and please keep sending me your emails to justiceforpiotr@gmail.com
* I will write in more detail about this in my next postings
** I will write in more detail about this in my next postings
