HOMEPAGE

Here is a complete account of the correspondences between Marcin Borus and myself. Mr. Borus was the second attorney assigned to my case.

All of the letters are dated and some have full headers from the original e-mails. I have added from time to time some notes, but not very often. I think that this correspondence speaks for itself, really. And you can back reference to the court testimonies themselves where it is aplicable.

However, it is vital to point out that there is never anywhere in these letters any reference to Zaremba’s filing a false document concerning the damages to his car or to any specific testimonial discrepancies. Mr Borus never mentioned these things to me in the whole of our involvement. And the nature of that involvement I believe is quite clear: He had no intention of making any disturbances of Zaremba in this case. And if this is saying it too lightly, it might be better said that the guy was defending him rather than me.

I am going to be adding to this over the next few weeks, but I wanted to get all of the letters out there into the public along with all of the rest of the court documents.

The Marcin Borus Correspondences



Thu, 24 Oct 2002 00:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
Dear Sir,

Sorry for the delay on the internet. Here is my e-mail address.

Also, as my trial is set for next Thursday, I am a bit worried about my situation and would like to talk about this case and how we shall present ourselves. Also, I would like to speak about questions that should be asked of Mr. Zareba and also some witnesses I would like to call in this. Specifically Mr. Jersey Twardowski, who was one of my translators in this case on the day I had my bike examined, and Zareba's daughter who was in the car at the time of the incident.

And, in addition to this, because the physical properties of this incident were specific to place, I would like to have the judge agree to go to the intersection of Solidarnoci and Marscsalkowska to see for themselves some things about this case. I feel that I am reasonably well acquainted with the situation, however, I would really like to feel that we are all in this together so that I have the best chance of success in this.

Thank you for our time, and if you could please respond to this quickly and let me know when would be the soonest possible meting to over the situation, I would be most grateful.

Yours, Adam Goodman

Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:01:17 +0100
Dear Mr. Goodman,


Thank you for your message.

We are studying your case and the papers you have submitted.

We need to meet before the hearing and discuss the action plan.

Please get in touch with my legal assistant Mr. Marcin Boruc to discuss our farther
procedures and getting clear picture of the key events.

Regards,

Sylwester Pieckowski

Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 01:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
Dear Sir,

Your name has just been given to me by Sylwester Pieckowski. I suppose you have my case files now. I sent an e-mail this morning to your firm concerning witnesses and a possible location change for this trial/hearing. I would like to get together with you as soon as possible. I will check in on this e-mail this afternoon, and I am available for meetings any time that it is convenient for you. Also, if there is anything else that you need from me in terms of information, please do not hesitate to ask. Unfortunately I have no cell phone, but via e-mail is always good and all of what I have is on the net as well.

Thank you for your interest in my case. I look forward to meeting with soon,

Yours,

Adam Goodman

Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:26:59 +0100
Dear Mr. Goodman,

I need more time to study the case. I will contact you on Monday. I think we could
meet on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Kind regards,



Marcin Boruc



Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:09:06 -0700 (PDT)
I understand. However, I would like to at least meet and talk before this. I think I need to call some witnesses and I am not sure how to do this. I would move to extend the date of the trial if we can not be prepared to do what we would like to do. But also, because I feel I should win this (but for the obvious Warsaw corruption...) I would like to be in court on Thursday because freedom allows me to resume my life... and in this, the sooner the better is my liking...

So, if you would have 30 minutes to an hour today (I assume you get this Friday morning) I would like to come by and at least work out the issues of witnesses and having the trial at the location where the event happened. I would check this e-mail by say, 10:00am and if you could squeeze me in, I would be much appreciative.

Yours,

Adam Goodman

Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:14:21 +0100

Dear Mr. Goodman,

I have just read your e-mail. Today I cannot meet with you (I am extremely busy and
I haven't finished reading your files). But we could meet on Monday, say 3 p.m. Let
me know if it is OK for you.

We have no chance for having the trial at the location where the event happened instead of the hearing to take place in the Court set for Thursday. We will be able to apply for visiting that place during the coming hearing; the same refers to
witnesses. It means, that having meeting after the weekend will be enough and I will be better prepared then.

Kind regards,

Marcin Boruc


Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 04:16:29 -0800 (PST)

Here is a list of questions that I have been thinking of for Zareba... mostly I see these as more groups of questions but I am clear as to what you have told me...

Concerning money?

How much do you earn? What goes out of your house? Do you ever do work on the side? Do you do security work? Has anyone ever offered you money to do side security jobs? To do protection jobs?

About his job

What are your duties as a cop? What were your normal hours that day? How is your police record? Have you ever had problems or complaints as to violence or abuse? How long have you been a cop? Do you own a personal gun? Have you received police driving training? If so how many? Have you ever in you job had to arrest a biker? Have you ever had to pull a biker aside? Do you ride a bike?

About the incident

Had you ever seen me before? Did you know who I was? Did anybody pay you to stop me? Where were you going at that moment? Where is your house? Why was your daughter with you> what was her schedule for school? What else did you have to do that day? Did you have other business? Were you in a hurry? Were there someplace you had to be? Was there something your daughter had to do that day? Why did you park closer then the others to the bus? Were you angry? Did you say kourva? Why did you leave the scene of the accident? Why didn't you call while your car was being attacked and only during the fight? Did you call? Did you call the number? Could you hear the phone ring? The answering machine?

His habits and money

Do you drink? Do you smoke? Do you like to gamble? Do you take drugs? Would you be willing to take a drug test? Have you ever had any problems in your marriage do to money? Have you had a problem making payments on bills? Have you bought another car? How much did you pay for this car? A month in insurance? Was the insurance in force at the time of the incident? How do you get around town now?

Misc.

Would you be confident if we called your daughter as a witness? Would you be happy for her to speak in your defense in court? Do you know what is the penalty for lying is? What will you do if this court finds that you were lying?

I contacted firma Skuczynski on Gibalskiego ul. He is a friend and a reputable bike man. He has seen me rebuild a hub and build a wheel and he knows that I know my business and he knows my bike. I gave him your card and you can talk to him. I will be their tomorrow with the bike. Good luck to us. And really thank you for everything. Really.

Adam


Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:53:58 +0100

Hi,
I suggest that you drop most of your questions to Zareba. We will discuss it later as I believe that tomorrow you will be the only person to be heard. Enclosed please find the basic list of questions I am going to ask you.
I have talked to Mr. Skuczyсski.
See you tomorrow at 10.50 a.m. at the entrance to the Court. MB

List of questions
1. What do you do in your life
2. For how long have you been biking
3. Why did you visit Warsaw
4. Why did you need to visit Warsaw to renew your visa
5. How many times have you been to Warsaw/what do you think about bikers’ life in this city
6. What is special about your bike/what does it object mean to you/why do you use the track racing bike/why you bike forces you to be extremely careful
7. What where your plans for that day
8. How were you dressed
9. Why did you try to overtake the bus/how you did it
10. What did Z do/ where and how did he stop his car
11. Why do you think Z did it intentionally
12. What was Z’s behavior like (what did he tell, did he try to hurt you)
13. What did you think/fill when the car attacked you
14. Why did you paunch Z/in what manner and how strong – did you have any marks on your hand
15. Have you seen anybody else in the car
16. Were the bike was located during the incident and why
17. Did you ever heard that Z has a gun and wishes to use it against you
18. What did you do after the incident
19. Why did you decide to inform the police and how did you know where is the closest police station
20. How was you treated by the police (did the carry out personal research)
21. Why are you interested in an efficient conduct of this case
22. Did you know any cyclist who was killed by a driver
23. What is your financial standing/how do you pay for your stay in Warsaw/what is an impact of your stay in Warsaw for your life
24. What would you do if the court returned your passport/ what are your plans for future



>>> Adam Goodman



Mon, 04 Nov 2002
I filed the complaint with the Court.

Yesterday I have talked to the friend of mine who conducts the leading bike firm in
the city. I mentioned him that I deal with the case involving an American bike man
who stuck in Poland with no financial means. The question is if would you be
interested in getting a job from him.

Regards, MB

Tue, 05 Nov 2002
Thank you for the Bush. What do you mean by gossip ... (by the way I have not read the papers you have sent me recently)?

The friend of mine conducting the bike business is Arek Kozіowski (mobile: 0602 370
100; e -mail: armar@skleprowerowy.pl). Please contact him. I will give him your
E-mail, too. Regards, MB

>>> Adam Goodman 11/05/02 10:21am >>>

Yes... but between you and I, you must understand where my heart and my interests lie. But between what I am into now and working with bikes, I would always go to the
bikes. I would talk to them. What is he situation?

Also, what did you think of the paper I sent to you? Really this was the paper that
was the basis of the pretrial gossip.

Please let me know what is necessary to make a meeting with your bike friend.

Adam



Wed, 6 Nov 2002 01:31:36 -0800 (PST)

I have a few thoughts about... well, "tactics" might be the word, but I simply can't talk about them today. I’ll send the list tomorrow, but it has to do with calling the daughter to the stand. What I want to say is a little complicated, but I think it makes sense... I’ll get it to you tomorrow morning.

Adam

Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 05:59:16 -0800 (PST)

Hey,

I am sorry for the delay. The last few days have been very busy for me and I have had no time to find an Internet cafй…

The reason for this letter is to talk to you about the situation involving the using of Zareba’s daughter as a witness. Now, I understand what you have said to me regarding this, and really, you must understand that I am in full agreement as to the pitfalls “strategically” with using this 11-year-old girl. But there are some things about this situation that I have been thinking allot about and I wanted to share some of these thoughts with you and to hear what your response to this would be.

So, the biggest problem I have with calling this girl is not that she would be “prepared” by her father and whoever else in involved with this, but that there will be some preparation done at all. You see, this girl is 11 years old, and the genuine truth of the situation is that Zareba did attack me with his car. Now, the girl was in the car, and she not only saw everything, but she already really knows that her dad has lied about it. Of this, I am absolutely sure. But the situation has not gone away, and now there is a whole big court battle going on because of her father’s actions and his lies. So ok, Zareba is an adult, and he had made his decisions and done what he has done; he is responsible for his actions. But his girl is not. And for Zareba to “prepare this girl” is basically informing her that she must be a liar, one way or another. Now, I might be over-thinking about the reality of the innocence of an 11-year-old girl, but to my mind this is going to be a pretty profound thing in her life. Zareba is either going to agree to making his daughter be a liar, changing any illusions she might have of any merit to be found in the truth (and in doing so, she is going to ruin the life of an innocent man), or give himself up. And, if he does put her up to the lies, he is changing her in her life for ever. But more then this, if she fails to convince the court of his innocence because we brake her and she is caught out, because she can’t really lie all that well, she will be made to tell the truth after trying to lie, which will be even worse for her, and she will have been responsible for putting her own father in danger of discovery. And, if she is not “prepared and simply tells the truth, about her fathers actions in court, even though this would be the ideal thing, this of course will do him some harm as well.

Now, to me this is some pretty heavy thinking, and my mind has been on this for quite some time. I myself am not very happy about the possibility of harming this mans family. But, I think what is even worse then what my feelings for this subject are is the fact that I have no belief that Zareba would even think that anything would be wrong here. I mean, to my mind, having to tell his daughter to lie in court, and what this makes of the integrity of all the future of her life is a pretty big thing. If it was my family, especially as anything that he will do in terms of making up more lies is all a gamble, I am not sure I would want to put my daughter through it. Even the process of asking the girl to lie does damage to her. So you see, I really think that this whole business is terrible. However, there is no reason in the world I should “take a dive” for this man. None. He along with the other attorney and the prosecutor has harmed me in this greatly and all with no regard for my life at all. So for me, I would never hesitate to call her. For sure. She was there, she is young, and I would do this only because the odds of hearing the truth form her are greater then from anybody. And this is even if all we are going to do is to ask the sorts of questions she would not be prepared for…

So, my point is I want to put her on the stand and I want them to know that I want this. But really, what I want is for Zareba to understand that taking his little game to this level is really going to hurt his family. He must be made to understand that by doing this thing he has done with his daughter in the car was a pretty bad thing: He endangered her life as well as mine. But to make her lie about this, and to play with her young mind at this time, is perhaps an even more serious thing. I mean, playing games with his daughters head is much worse then playing stupid extortion games with foreigners; this is playing games with his own family…

So this is what I was thinking about. Maybe you could send me a few thoughts on the subject. And, in addition to this, I think it might be a good idea to have people come in and watch this next court session. I think an audience would do a lot of good. I think I would like for a lot of people to put their eyes on Zareba the next time we get together… just sort of letting him know that people see him. Maybe even a group of bikers, just so they know his name and his face. A lot of people saw what he did on the 15th. I just think he must be made to understand that this is not really some game that is played in the shadows, but more like something he is doing to his name and his face in public…

Adam

Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:32:43 +0100

Hello, thanks for your e-mail. So it is decided that we will call Zaremba's daugthter to give her testimony. I will apply for this before the next hearing but after the court's decision referring to your passport. I fully agree with you that having audience, especially the one consisting of the bikers, would be a good thing. Take care,
Marcin Boruc


Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:56:28 -0800 (PST)

Good, but there is on more thing about this... I don't know exactly how this could be done, but I think I would really like it if Zaremba was fully aware of the circumstance... does he have an attorney in this? I didn't see anyone, but someone helped him write his law suit claim... I really think that it would be to everyone's benefit, especially as there are risks involved in lying here that he should at least be given a chance to think about what all id going on with him and his life about now... my belief is that Zareba feels quite well protected here. But, he is still lying and to bring his daughter in is an issue I would think... any idea about this?


Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:07:50 +0100



At the moment Zaremba has not an attorney.

I want to make him aware before the next hearing that we plan to take a testimony from his daughter. But at the same time I want his daughter to be summoned to the
court later (not for the coming court hearing).

Now I have to leave my office. Regards, MB


Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 02:16:05 -0800 (PST)

Any reasoning? And also, are they going to keep putting a month in between all of these hearings? And also, is there some way that we can play up Zareba's "panic attack" during his questions? I mean, did anyone notice that he asked me a question about my touching his car, I turned it around and asked him if he meant "when you drove in front of me", he said yes, I answered the question and then he ran from the court room to make a phone call... I mean, that was pretty dramatic don't you think?

I guess what I am asking about is if there is something we can do to get to the heart of this dirty mans lying. It is why I have been held here you know?

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 03:57:49 -0800 (PST)

Good morning,

Ok, I just want to ask you one question about the calling of Katzerina to the stand. Now, is there some reason to wait on calling her? I think that we would even do such a thing would seem to imply that we are serious about what we say is the truth of the situation. I mean, she was there and all, and she is the only third party to have seen anything. I know there is the moral dilemma that I talked about in the last e-mails that I sent you, but there is another shade to this in that the court might understand that by calling this girl, we are quite serious as to our claims. And again, if Zareba is lying (and Zareba is lying) the whole of the case is false and should never have been begun.

And also, I am not so foolish not to understand that Zareba is a cop and hat this gives him some legal status, but he is a fool, and this is still court, and really there must be some way to get these judges to begin to see hat the truth of the situation really is at this point.

So, unless you have some real reasons not to call the daughter this time, I would think that we should.

Also, along the lines of an audience, I am inviting Piotr Molga from the Gazetta to come to the trial on the 5th. I have a history with this guy and we do not actually like each other, but he is aware of the whole of this story as much as anybody. So I thought that every little bit of pressure that we could bring to this the better because I am only telling the truth, and the other side needs to get their stories straight. A high-pressure meeting can only help our side and cause theirs to crack, which at least in a fair court fight is what we want.

Adam

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:27:16 +0100

Today I have called the Circuit Court (the court of 2nd instance) to check the status of our complaint. I received an answer that it will be returned to the District Court (1st instance) for the formal reasons. They were not able to specify these reasons. I will check it but anyway - there is no chance that the Circuit Court makes its merital decision before Dec. 5.

If we want to keep this date (the District Court will not proceed without the files) I have to withdraw our complaint and try to regain you passport on the 5th.

So I am going to prepare a letter to the Court on withdrawal of the complaint and on our proposals as to the evidence (ex. Zareba's daughter).

Let me know what is your position. Regards,
>>> Adam Goodman 11/18/02 12:57pm >>>

Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 03:41:04 -0800 (PST)

I think I understand this... I guess you mean that the second court is the higher court that our judge sent this complaint to. Now, did this higher court refuse our request, or simply doing nothing about it? I guess I do not understand what you mean by "the formal reasons"... do you mean the former reasons, as in, preventative measures, or is it that they want this lower court to decide?

But to me, it sounds more like a game than a decision about letting me get on with my life, specifically as, as you say, there would be no chance to have this same court date as well as getting a response to our request.

So, is there a way to speak to the judge ahead of time and find out what their position is? If they are inclined to give me back my passport but make me wait for court, I have some new business to attend to as my play is currently on the desk of the theatre in Belarus. I think my being there would greatly help to get that deal done, whereas, if I am relying on other people to speak for me, the theatre will believe that I do not care to participate in this production, which is the farthest thing from the truth... so, I want to leave Poland, but I do also wish to fight this thing to its end. And by this I mean that I am willing to do whatever I have to do to get the truth out of these rather filthy people (and their kids...).

So, if this conversation is possible, my freedom immediately has some benefit for me, but most especially in about one month from now for a long stay and for a short visit immediately... so as this is my situation, is this deal possible? I should say however, hat I can not pay any bail at this time, and they would have to agree to simply trust me that I have an interest in this case.... I can think of about 5,000,000 reason to care about what all has happened to me.

And a good morning right back at you!

Adam


Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:56:52 +0100

Thank you for the history - I need time to pass through it and unfortunately it has to wait.

I determined the status of the case. The higher court refused to examine the case due to the fact that the lower court's decision was signed only by one judge instead of three and returned the files for this reason. Then the lower court completed the
Missing signatures and today was to send it again to the higher court. I still hope that the higher court will manage to make its decision at the latest on Dec. 2nd. If not - I will withdraw our complaint. I am going to monitor the situation in this higher court (I have already drawn their attention to the fact that they have to proceed quickly).
In the meantime (on coming Monday/Tuesday) I will file with the lower court our application for taking evidence. I will forward it to you, of course. Today I am going to the mountain downhilling. It will be helpful in preparing a good evidence motion.

Regards,


>>> Adam Goodman


Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 01:39:54 -0800 (PST)

Sorry I didn't respond quicker, but I was not able to use the internet for a few days. But this only delayed my "ok" on what is going on. It sounds like we can get both a response to the request as well as our court process moving along. I am not sure about Tatyana on this trip; it is getting really expensive to bring her here. And even though I much prefer to be with her than not, she has a child and a life and there simply isn't right nor is there enough money to keep playing with her this way...

But, my friend Marcin has been with me through this whole thing, give or take. I a not sure his sister Ella (the one who wrote the letter in my presentation) would want to come, but if she did, she would be a good witness as to my riding skills as we have made a few traffic rides together, and specifically as to my ability to go between the cars, she would be ok. You mentioned Betty, and he is a pretty weird guy, but he is a track bike rider so he might be a good guy for some words about that. My friend from the bike shop... and Zareba's daughter. Other than that, I can get you more letters from my investors, my original paperwork from my visa from the 15th of may and some stuff about my financial situation (borrowing and being broke) if any of this helps...


If there is something else you need from me, let me know. So, all of this and I think that the Gazetta might be there too on the 5th...

Other than that, how was the down-hilling?

Adam


Tue, 26 Nov 2002 02:35:04 -0800 (PST)



Ok, I know I am a little late in this, but I do have another argument as to why they should give me back my passport. According to the indictment, the precautionary measure was ordered by the judge as a necessary measure. However, this was simply not the case. The original judge ordered bail (this was Agneska Kowelwska) but this was stopped pending a complaint by the prosecutor Wiesniakjowski. A hearing was held bout this issue, but I did not know about it because I missed the original message and Wiesniakowski lied to the American embassy on the June the 12th. All of this is in my original report. So, as the original judge did not think that this was a necessary thing, and that the tactics of the prosecutor had been somewhat... underhanded, there should be no reason not to allow me my freedom to actually exist in my life while we are trying to figure out why Poland can't see the difference between a stupid foolish lie and the truth, all of the in-depth of this story is in my report (time line and essay) and the girl who found this out for me is the girl we are thinking about as another or our witnesses.

And, again, if Zareba has lied, I did not do it! And, Zareba lied. Let us not forget this.

What do you think?

Adam


: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 02:00:50 -0800 (PST)



Ok, so we are one week from the next episode of this case. Is there anything you can tell me about next Thursday that I should know about? What is the format going to be and what can I expect to see and hear there? Do you know if it is going to be all Zareba, or will we hear from witnesses? Do I get to ask questions of them, and what is the format like when I do? Will this be the last court day, or will there be something else to look forward to?

And, is there any use for the stuff I talked to you about in your last letter?

Please, let me know,

Adam


Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:04:50 -0800 (PST)


Dear Macron,

So? What did you think? Zareba admits there was not only previous damage to the car, but massive damage to the car. He admits to lying about being hit at the KSP. He changes the story about throwing the bike at the car, saying now that it was not an aggressive action but that it was perhaps an accident. Of his two witnesses, one says nothing except that the car was in worse shape then Zareba let on when he bought it from him (totaled after Zareba drove it into a tree-and apparently Zareba lied to him too!) and the other witness refuses to participate at all. Zareba has now changed his story for the fourth time. there are no witnesses at all for his side now, and the only thing that drives this case is the word of an unreliable witness who has now been confirmed by his own side that he is a habitual liar. so, what do you think? do you know why I am still here?

This issue of how he describes my actions on my bike should be easy to prove because it is impossible to either put your foot down or to make a 90 degree turn at speed in less then three meters because the bike has no brakes and there is no freewheel to allow the bike to coast. Also, that the bike has no brakes refutes the story hat the "brake levers" touched his car as well. He is obviously describing a mountain bike, and not the reality of the situation. After this, there is my character and history, all confirmed in my documents submitted before the first day of the trial... and, regardless of form, the translator has said in court twice, that the lost document made by the police describing the bikes condition on the 17th of may was indeed made...

What was your opinion about the day? And, have you any idea's bout what I can do to end this? I still do not know what there is to do about any of this...can I press charges? Should I have moved for an arrest? Really, isn't this over yet?

Adam

Ps, a copy of this letter is also going out to a list of people who have an interest in myself and/or this case.

Dear Adam,

I want to start this email with the fundamental statement I have already made to you: MY ROLE IS NOT TO PLEASE YOU, BUT TO DEFEND YOU AS EFFECTIVELY AS I CAN. I remade
This statement because I am afraid you are not fully aware that my ONLY objective is to help you.

The last hearing day was not bad (your summary describes the positives), but it could be much better (I believe we could win the court's liking but WE DID NOT).

As you could realize I spent quite a long time talking to the judges and the prosecutor privately. I wanted to determine their feelings about the parties and our motions for evidence. I wanted to convince them that it is very important to enable me to
Ask Zareba about his duties as a policeman and to analyze the details of your bike, which is completely different from the bikes they know. Tried to convince the ladies to return your passport. My after-discussion findings are as follows:
1) They will keep your passport to the end of the trial (unless the higher court decides to allow you to leave Poland); it means that planning our moves we should take into consideration the factor of time;
2) They will focus on the fact that you hit Zareba. At the moment they seem not to believe that it was self - defense. This is because you punched his face much later than he attacked you and they find you very irritable and impulsive (it is the effect of your behavior in the court secretariat, court corridors and court rooms);
3) As they want focus on the above mentioned charge they are against the motions prolonging the trial more than it is really necessary (especially motions regarding Twardowski and inspection of the place).

I also want to emphasize that discrepancies between our positions shown during the hearing are not only painful for me and questions the essence of our relationship, but also negatively influences your image in the court's eyes (I think the court can find you as the irrationally stubborn person) and spoils my relationship with the court worked out by me.
I try to respect the court's expectations if they don't infringe my client's interests. It is always worth a while. I am convinced that we could withdraw motions regarding Mr.Twardowski (replacing it by the motion for calling Judge Agnieszka Komorowicz to give her testimony as a witness and for applying to the Police for delivery of the bike inspection protocol) and regarding the place of the incident. The aims we wanted to reach by these motions are possible to reach by other means, which are much more convenient for the court (and if the result is different from our expectations we can always come back to the original idea).
My opinion is that by withdrawing the subject motions we would win time (we could apply to the court to take all the remaining evidence next time which would make it possible to end the case during the next hearing) and better atmosphere. Also I
Would like repeat what I said to you just after the hearing: I feel that the court will reject the subject motions.

So I would like to ask you for:
1) Reanalyzing your position regarding motions for evidence;
2) Prepare yourself to convince the court that hitting Zareba you were self - defending (during the last hearing I tried to make you telling about your most traumatic bike-cars adventures and about tragic deaths of your friends killed by drivers;
3) To provide me with your addresses and telephone numbers in Poland and in Bielorussia. I want to convince the higher court that you have the addresses (apart from Altheimer&Gray's address) they can send the correspondence to and under which you can be found;
4) To provide me with the information if you want to take part in the Circuit Court's (the higher court) session set for De. 19, 10:00 AM (if so it would be necessary to apply for calling the sworn translator). My suggestion is that you should not appear in the court. In such sessions, the accused and his attorney usually don't take part (they are even not notified by the court on the date of the session). Basically it is limited only to the legal issues.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,


Marcin Boruc



Mon, 09 Dec 2002 13:57:49 +0100

Dear Adam,

We haven't touched this problem before but probably you have one more legal problem in Poland. Although your passport was taken by Polish court which prohibited you leaving Poland your prolonged stay here is illegal (it is misdemeanor under Polish law) unless you have visa.

If you are interested in having possibility of entering Poland in the future you should get a visa. If you do not get a visa it is very likely that leaving Poland you will be entered to the register of unwelcome foreigners.

So, my suggestion is that if you have no valid visa, you should apply for such. Of course I would help you. According to the information received both from the Office for Repatriation and Foreigners and from Voyvodship Office he procedure would take several weeks which means it is very desired to start it as soon as possible. From the other hand I have tried to determine if you would have possibility to commence the procedure having no passport, but I got no concrete answer. The only way to check the system is to try it.

The situation is rather absurd but real and we have to deal with it.


Best regards,



Macron Boric


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 03:28:02 -0800 (PST)
Ok, I’ll bite. I entered Poland the first time from the Czech republic. This stamp is in my old passport, and of course, the last one's from Belarus in May... Americans do not pay for visas, so what do you think I must do?

Also, I guess I forgot about it, but Zareba admitting to grabbing my finger sort of puts the thing into perspective don't you think? I mean, I am standing there pointing my finger at him, which sort of means I had something to say to him.... Do you think that this reality has sunken in as of yet?

I am thinking of writing letter to the judge giving my opinion of all we have seen. And this would also be to the judge on the 19th. What do you think of this?

And, also, one of the last things that I heard in court the other night was the prosecutor reading something as an excuse not to give me back my passport. Now, what was translated to me was that I had made a statement that sounded something like "I have the money in the account but there is no one I trust to go and get it"... what did she actually say? And was this something from the first court hearing back in may? And along these lines, I don't know that we have made it clear that the decision for the preventative measure was NOT the original idea, but that what was wanted was 4000pln for bail, which I agreed to. It was the prosecutor who complained about this to the court. And the hearing regarding this that was scheduled for June 13th was the one I was kept from going to because of the lie told by Wiesniakowski to the AMERICAN EMBASSY. Now, I don't know anything about the tricks and ins and outs of this, but if the original information is false (as with Zareba) then there is no grounds for using this information as a basis for argument. Am I wrong here?

What do you think?

And, can we simply move to have the trial ended on the ground that there simply is no case against me and a very good one against Zareba?

And again, what do you think?

Adam


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:02:12 -0800 (PST)
Ok, I will try to say this again myself... this trial is that I attacked some guy on the street. The guy was a cop, and this trial is based simply on the testimony of a guy who said that he had done nothing to draw the attention of the attack. This man, is now a confirmed liar. He lied about the car, the use of the bike, his cars history, the damage to his body... he has admitted that almost all I have said about the situation was true. And in addition to this, what is left of his story is remarkably unbelievable. I simply do not understand why the focus, even after all of this has happened must remain on me, and not the situation. And, why we must make the comfort of the judges supercede the rigorous pursuit of the truth.

To tell me something like:

They will focus on the fact that you hit Zareba. At the moment they seem not to believe that it was self - defense. This is because you punched his face much later than he attacked you and they find you very irritable and impulsive (it is the effect of your behavior in the court secretariat, court corridors and court rooms);

Is an insult to my intelligence. The time frame from being attacked by a speeding car from behind and then having that car pin you to a bus and punching the guy in the head that did it is about 5 seconds... perhaps we don't need go as far as you think in this. I was attacked on the streets of Warsaw. I hit the guy who attacked me. I went to the cops for protection and was arrested and effectively tried and convicted without trial. And worse, Warsaw has seen fit to continue the attack for seven months and all at my personal expense. Do you wish to speak to me about dignity? They are defending an ADMITTED LIAR in their courtrooms! What is the aim of the prosecution? The original attack was completely, entirely, and absolutely without even the tiniest thread of provocation. Zareba was robbing me, get it? He wanted money from me? This was a thief who attacked a biker with his car. IS THIS SO SMALL? DO YOU WANT FROM ME A COMPROMISE? HOW MUCH OF THIS NONESENCE AM I SUPPOSED TO EAT?

And all of this to the extreme detriment of my woman, her family, my name, my business? You want me to look like what? You want me to let what go? Does anybody here have even the slightest gram of sense in this? I am not Warsaw’s bitch! I am a private citizen who had done nothing but come for a brief shopping trip to this city. The city has robbed me of my time and money. And you want me to be nicer to people? Do you want me not to be upset?

I have seen footage of one of your politicians making a fistfight in parliament. I have seen your cops literally attack people on the street. I have seen you guys at soccer games. And, please sir, I am a Jew, so do you wish to speak to me about that portion of your history?

There is...there is no case against me. There are no witness but for Zareba, and he has admitted to being a liar. I took my bike to the cops to show *(and this is without even knowing what I was being held for) that there was no damages to my bike, and so conversely to the car. They went and lost the evidence... Twardowski has told the court twice (!!!!) that he was there and the document existed...

What you are telling me is to be kinder to the people who are screwing me? I am sick of being here. I am sick of living in Poland. I am sick of the accusations. I am sick of the pain this is causing my life. I am sick of the endless, mindless stupidity! There is no justice in the justice system. You can not negotiate without my understanding what you are doing, and, you should not negotiate without me being there. And if this IS A NEGOTIATION, if you can actually negotiate something here, negotiate for the end of this with Zareba admitting once and for all he attacked me with the car!

Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:17:58 -0800 (PST)

Ok, I had to go and do something, but there was one more thing to say: this issue of a permanent address is a real thing. The way Wiesniakowski described this to me was that every polak must have this thing, and it relates to their citizenship and residency in Poland. I was told that there was to be some character evaluation based upon how I live, to be made during the prosecution. Now the dictionary defines the word as follows:

per·ma·nent
Adj.

Lasting or remaining without essential change: "the universal human yearning for something permanent, enduring, without shadow of change" (Willa Cather).
Not expected to change in status, condition, or place: a permanent address; permanent secretary to the president.
So, if this is what you are talking about, I have none, because I did not live in Poland before, I have no business other that this trial here now, and, other than freedom of movement, I have no interest in Poland after this incident is finally and mercifully over. I have no familial ties; no business and all friends I have here are all from after may 15th. Now, I have made mailing addresses available every single day, and I have made a point of proving that not only was that where I could be reached, but I also went broke trying to stay there. But to ask me to say that I have anything permanent in Poland is to ask me to lie. And as of this moment, I have never told a lie of any kind since the beginning. So, unless someone has mistranslated this to me, or the meaning is something else, I am not going to play this game because it would make me a liar, and my word, and my character and my name are all I have based everything I have done on. What I do in the world is what I believe in. this is the bikes and the plays I write. And I either have credibility, or I have nothing. So we really ought to be getting to the bottom line here that this case IS ABOUT HONESTY and nothing else.

All of this to me is and has been simple extortion. I see no other word that describes this.

Adam


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:27:03 +0100

Dear Adam,

I want to win the case. I do my best to achieve this result. I spend much more time
On this case than on any other similar one.
Your letter proves you do not realize it. It also proves you don't trust me both a a man and as a professional. It makes me sad and, what is much more relevant, hurts the basis of our relationship. In normal circumstances it should cause my resignation as yor counsel for defense. But I find the circumstances very special and for this reason I do not want to quit without trying to cure the situation.

I am ready to defend you to the very end of the trial. But ONLY under the condition that you stop trying to treat me like your tool and submit to my concept of defense.
I want, of course, to know your opinions and remain open for discussion with you but I want to be the only final decision-maker.
In the court our positions should be absolutely uniform.

Do you agree to my conditions? If not, we quit.



Marcin Boruc

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:51:39 -0800 (PST)

I guess we really do not understand each other. In the states, the word we use to refer to lawyers is councilor. I don't know if I spelled this correctly, but its meaning is clear: to council, to advise, to assist. I know you are not being paid for this, and I can appreciate this. However, this case is not only about if I win or lose, it is about abuse of the system. That there are discussions to be made between prosecutor and defense is normal. That there is discussion between the parties is normal. But I simply cannot sit here and be railroaded by your system or by you. Telling me that you wish to have compliance is an insult to me. You are asking me to sit down and be a good boy. This is what was said by Zareba, the prosecutor, by the last attorney...

Perhaps what you ought to do is to rethink this proposition. What if this was not about a negotiation? What if this thing we are doing is not, despite what the court says, a simple argument about my character? What if this case was actually defining your system and, because of the dollar differences, your very culture? What if the issues of systemic corruption were at stake? What if we are actually fighting your de facto understanding that "the police are always right"? What if we are attacking the story of a corrupt policeman, who, in terms of everything that anybody would ever think was right should be censured?

Now, what I am saying to you is that my position is not now, nor has it ever been that "Adam", all alone and caring only about the food he eats and where he sleeps, with no other connection to the world whatsoever, want's only to be free from a crime he has done. My position is this:

I have been buried in a system for a crime I did not commit. The act of burying me has been performed by people within the system. All of this is (and if it isn't, it should be) illegal. If you have no wish to directly go after this case, and more specifically, if you wish do say and do things without my permission or knowledge, and the effect of these things (possible or otherwise) is not told to me, you are not defending the case.

And as far as time spent, yep, you are right, it probably does take longer to prepare for this. But, if we mistrial because our witness was used as a translator, we all knew about this before hand because I gave you my documents on the first day of our meeting. If this was a mistake, we should have dealt with it before and not now.

If the court wants to go quickly, my pleading guilty, or agreeing to lessen the severity of my attacking the liar who cause caused grave ruin to my life is not something to be bargained away lightly.

If there is a way to speed this up, I believe it has to do, again, with Zareba, who is the sole and only driving force in this case. There is no other evidence. None. Only his word. And about his word and character:

1. He lied about his teeth. Admitted in court, and proved by his medical report.

2. He lied about my hitting the car with my bike. Admitted in court.

3. He lied about getting hit at the KSP.

4. He lied about the previous condition of his car. Admitted in court, and verified by his witness that not only was there previous damage, but massive damage done by an incompetent driver-Zareba himself. (Also along this line, it is a crime in the states to lie about the condition of a car for the purposes of gaining a higher value for that car at sale.

5. He has admitted about having a finger pointed at him which, if nothing else adds clarity to the picture of what happened during the events: namely that I was not abusing his car, but talking to him!

6. His new description of my riding is physically impossible because of the bike I ride, and this applies also to his imaginary recollection of my cutting in front of him.

And finally, if you intend to tell me, that going to the court to try and get all the information I can, or trying to do everything necessary to end this case is poor form, it is that you are asking me to accept as fair a system that has done all of this to me for over half a year. And, as my last lawyer also wanted my head in the sand and my ass in the air, I would say that the choice you are asking me to make is wholly ridiculous, unreasonable and more likely attached to your firm’s lack of income from me in this case. My real feeling is that you or at least your firm thinks of me as a monetary waist of time and that this has become an issue in you thinking. I however feel, that you have wasted ALL OF THE MONEY IN ALL OF MY LIFE, MY CREDIT, MY NAME, MY REPUTATION, ALL FOR THE BENIFIT OF A LIAR, A CHEAT AND A THIEF.

Do not ask me to die for your sins Marcin. I am not Jesus Christ. I am not even a Christian. I am a bike man of a long experience. And this cop is painting a picture that can not exist. The only thing I ever asked you to do is to bury this guy. If he is a liar, and at least what I can see, no matter what anyone thinks of me in terms of the high school personality nonsense you are telling me is important, this case is a farce.

Do what you want. My feeling is that you either want to do this or you don't. But if you or your company is thinking money and not results, you are not defending me anyway...

So, have we won? Have they agreed with us? Is Zareba to be held? If this is so, we rest. If not we go.

I really have to go, but I had an idea for a conversation about crimes and torts I wanted to share with you, but I will have to do it in an hour or two. I will send another e-mail today.

Adam



Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 03:19:57 -0800 (PST)

Ok,

I have a few to say. I would like to say just a few more things about this situation that may or may not be clear. Firstly, who exactly is supposed to tell me what I am to do with my money, my time and my name? If I wish to do business in Belarus and not in Poland, who is speaking to me about this? As far as I can see, Poland has done nothing but waste my time and my money. I had no plans for business here before I came through, and I certainly have no plans now. Would you say to me that because you (Poland) have the power to harm me that I should give you use of my money or my name? Should I allow you to control what I do or say on the basis of some power you have over me? What exactly does this do to my credibility? To my name? To my life?

And don't you think that this applies to participation in this case? Should I agree to anything that does not reflect some great benefit directly to myself or to my situation? Are you saying I should do this because of some "idea" of the comfort of others should mean something to me? What sort of investment are you asking of me? What more am I supposed to give you? And why? And where is my gain in all of this for me?
You see what I am saying? Where is the benefit of this "blind loyalty" on my part?

You see Marcin, and I really am trying to honest with you here, I am a communist. I truly believe that the world benefits greatly from unity. But I am not such a fool to divest myself of my ability to live without some real compensation? I understand Poland’s history and their involvement with Russia. I understand what your feelings may be politically. But I am simply a private citizen whose only connections to Belarus are familial and romantic and not political. I simply cannot permit Warsaw to dictate policy to me in this case, especially as there is no grounds for even the original conversation with me. I broke no laws. I caused no harm. I visited here honestly and in a gentle fashion, and all that happened to me is that this place has robbed me blind and continues to do so. I hear no arguments for anything that has any benefit to me whatsoever.

So what really is this situation asking of me? That I agree that Zareba had a right to try and kill me at his whim? That my money is his money? Or yours? Or Poland’s? That my right of decision making is yours, or Poland’s or Zareba's? What exactly are you asking me to do here? And really, should I be more delicate here, because and only because Poland has the power to harm me? Poland has harmed me. They have done nothing but harm me for more than half a year. Should I, as our dear friend Maka told me in an e-mail "accept my fait and enjoy my stay in Poland'? Really? My word, my time, my intelligence, my money and my name... because you have power of extortion and nothing else?

Ok... so let's settle up. What have you got off me so far?

About $6000 in loans intended for a bike business in Belarus and the production of a play there.
A laptop notebook worth about $2000, stolen from me from a place I was required to live in because of the prosecutors demanding to show something like a regular residence and my need to tell the truth.
One really nice leather bike seat...
The loss of income on my part for seven months.
The loss of my contribution in the household where I live in Belarus for seven months.
The loss of income of my partners, investors and translators in Belarus based upon the expectation (my word that it would be so) of these business ventures.
The loss of the money by my investors because the business did not begin.
The loss of face on my part to the investors, my friends, my partners, my translators and my family.
The loss, simply of my time, and a summer season which I had prepped for two months...this of course led to the allowance of others to fill the market gap I created while I was there...
I have never paid the people who helped me to write the report, which no one seems to care to read, because there has never been any money to do so...so they lost money too...
And what is the worst of all: the loss of hope that I guess I was bringing to a group of people who not only make only about $80 a month (!!!!) but whom I love, live with and feel an attachment to.

So, how much are we talking about here? $20,000? $30,000 in lost income and damages? $100,000? $5,000,000? And what about the fact that what I have been through could, with no problem what-so-ever, be classified as torture? Coercion? Lies? False accusations? The threat of imprisonment without trial? Being held without bail? Having the facts and evidences of this case lost or ignored? What is the result of Zareba's actions and the police's agreement with him (without the need for other witnesses on their part!)? how much must I suffer for this lunatic? how many people to whom I happily given my time and my effort (and these people are in a remarkably worse circumstance than anybody in Poland!) got robbed along with me here? for this extortion...

So this is what I have to say: Zareba tried to hit me with his car. He’s a traffic cop and he either flipped at the moment or he was robbing me. But me, I was a currier, and you simply cannot allow people to hit bikers with their cars. So I smacked him in the head and told him who he was to his face. But then, instead of simply saying he was wrong or sorry (fear of prosecution?) he ran to the cops, used his position as a cop to try and make me go away and told untrue stories about my actions and what those actions did. and everything we have seen and all that has happened to me come from the follows things that he said that we all know now are false:
That I broke his teeth
That the car had no damages before
That I used the bike a weapon
That he had done nothing to provoke me (parking closest to the bus)

These are all proven in court "LIES" ...

In addition to this, we have that his story about me cutting in front of him on the road and my putting my foot down and or scratching his car with my "break levers" still to prove as false. And that a police report was made... and, that we have his daughter, who's life he is now playing with, possibly as a witness.... other than this, do you need:
The papers from May 15th that I needed to get to get my visa? All dated and proof of where I was going?
Any letters from my friends and former associates as to my history as a biker, mechanic, playwright or anything regarding my character?
My old passport with stamps from over 30 countries?
You want copies of the plays I have written?
Medical records? A letter from my mom? And all of this only to say that the likely- hood that an independent American, with business both person and private to attend to that day, with the whole of his history indicating that he knew what he was doing would, without provocation, in broad daylight and in a manor that has no connection to his experience or personal health, take the trouble to sacrifice the whole of his life for the purposes of causing mild financial damage to one single polish fellows car, for over two minutes.... with none of this drawing even the slightest assistance from any of the 30 to fifty people there at the scene, including an imaginary police car that, amazingly enough, drives away without any contribution....

I mean, was I supposed to care about this guy? Did he matter to me at the time? Why would anybody attack Zareba in his life unless he had done something really stupid?

And you know when a guy crashes a car; the insurance companies usually want to raise his rates. When a guy wraps a car around a tree, it means he was drunk, or asleep... Zareba didn't own that car for very long. He doesn't have a lot of money. He was the one who had wrecked his life, not me. He is the unstable guy her Marcin, not me. Sorry, not me...

You tell me what you think I should do? If I go and complain about your motions, what does this do? Can we move to close the case based upon the evidence presented? Can we complain that the passport thing, and this is to the higher court, was not the original intended preventative measure, and that, mixed with our new understanding of Zareba's unreliability as witness, and the prosecutors lying to the embassy on the 12th (you have the evidence already) should allow me to resume my life without any new punishments heaped upon me? Can we do this?

or, and this is my last thought here in this long letter, would your firm be willing to represent me in a rather large damages suit against the state in this matter? I think there is a lot of money in his, and I think there is more than a good chance to win a really good settlement.

So, this is what I have to say. If you really think I am missing something here, please let me know and we can talk about this. But I really think all of this is pretty cut and dried for me. And what is better than all of this: IT IS THE TRUTH.

Other than this, as I am not in Warsaw, this is difficult for me, but would you be so kind as to e-mail me a copy of the transcripts of the last trial? Specifically the whole of Zareba's questioning, statements and the testimony of the guy who bought the car telling us about the previous damages from the tree. If you incur any costs in this, I will happily reimburse you at or next meeting.

Adam


Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:05:02 +0100

Adam,

You charge me with insulting you. I find your actions extremely insulting for me
(Ex.: according to your words I think of you and your case as a monetary waist of time.

I do not want a personal clash with you. I do want to concentrate on the case. I think we should have a face-to- face meeting and to determine the future of our relationship.

My proposals are: Thursday Dec. 17 after midday, Wednesday Dec. 18 after 10 AM or
Thursday Dec. 19 after the Circuit Court's session in your case, which is set for
10:00 AM (still I am your attorney which means that I am going represent you during the coming court's session).



Marcin Boruc


Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:00:37 +0100

Thank you. I hope I will have possibility to taste your plays. But you still haven't
Answer my proposal of meeting and my question regarding your participation in the higher court's session. MB


Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 03:44:43 -0800 (PST)


Marcin,

I think that you should take this letter very seriously.

I believe I have come to the understanding about the root of our problem (you and I). I believe that you have failed in one very important regard as my attorney in that you have failed to understand that any and all arguments that are on the table for discussion are indeed relevant and true. One of these arguments is about my supposed social acceptability, and I wish to address this issue with you hear.

For Zareba to hit me with a car is to simply state that he has a right and a reason to discontinue my existence. He is stating the he is more important than I, that he has no respect for my life and that he is free to play with my life at his will. On the 15th of May, I disagreed with this argument. But, because he is a cop, he has been granted an advantage in the over all discussion. This nobody will deny. However, to try and paint me in a diminished fashion because people want to have a biased view is both unfair and impartial. I am not a bad person. I am not in any way socially unacceptable, and there was absolutely no original reason for Zareba to assault me.

But, if you insist on ALLOWING any ideas as to my social status being in any way less then you are indeed working for the other side. If you have allowed in your attitude to reflect this, you are working for the other side. If in your discussions, you allow this to be, you are in fact aiding the other side.

So, let's talk about you, and me shall we? We both are human. We both are heterosexual. We both can read and write. We both spent some years in upper education. We both have professions. You are small man, I am a big man, you grow some hair on your head, and I do not. You are probably a Catholic, I am Jewish. And what? Are you intellectually superior to me? I do not believe this to be true. In my intellectual vocabulary are the odds and ends of about seven trades, including that of musician and writer. I have practiced these trades both in and out familiar situations- and even out my languages. Are you physically superior? As an athlete, well, I once hit a ball (baseball) within 17 feet of the world’s record. I have driven a golf ball more then 400 yards twice in my life. I have ridden a bike solo across the United States and I have used this same body as a consistent and successful bike messenger. But also, at the same time that I was riding, I was maintaining my position as a bike builder, mechanic and parts distributor.

I believe I am more then reasonably astute and intelligent. I believe I am moral, and in this, perhaps even to an extent that far over-stretches any asked-for sense of social compassion in anybody’s bible. I am a pretty good friend; I have been told I am a good lover. I have had some affairs with some rather... positioned women in my life. And I have also represented a California company as its de facto attorney in court, lower and appeals, to a record of 51 victories as compared to four defeats.

Not bad?

But in this case, when I offered twenty odd letters of recommendation to the prosecutor as evidence that I indeed have a life, he refuses to even speak of this because it does not suit his ideas of the results he wants in his case. By doing this, he has discredited me and builds a sense of "social unsuitability" around me spreading malicious gossip about me concerning my intents in this case, or my life outside of this. So, in my conversations with you, I have tried to make available any evidences you may need to make any formal proofs as to the validity of my life, my talent or my activities. But as of this moment, it is my opinion that you have not seemed to think anything of this as well.

And so finally, as I am forced to listen to you tell me that you feel you have no interest in representing me because I will not allow you to make decisions for me without my knowledge is an insult of the highest order. It is in fact the exact same activity as was practiced on me by Zareba and by the prosecutor and by the court. What you are saying to me is that my presence is making your life more difficult. For you to even raise this argument in any way, especially as your social position in relation to me is the same one as Zareba's is to the city of Warsaw, you are indeed guilty of this same sort of perverse prejudice that has stolen from me so many months of my life.

Friends have told me that because of some ethnic issue or because of some spillover from a desire to join the EU, you are requiring some sort of "demonstration" on my part as to the validity of my life. And that you are not feeling me because you feel that you have been able to diminish me. I have been told that you may be doing this out of some sense of social inferiority on your part cause by my status as an American, or by some perception of a division of wealth (jealousy) on your part. I have even been told that this is some perverse comeuppance on your part because of your feelings of subjugation at the hands of the Russians in the past 50 years and by the west now. Well, certainly we all have feelings. I have mine, and I have said these things to you in the past, directly and to your face.

But, if you have any feeling that you, or anybody is better than me, or that my rights as a human can be dismissed in any way because of any reason whatsoever, then you are as guilty of the exact same social distortion that made for the deaths of six million Jews in the very state we are standing in and at the hands of exactly the same people. And, by your actions or conversations, if you even allow a detrimental attitude in any way to exist (and this includes any agreements on your part as to even a moment of anything that resembles any social down-putting in my direction), you are not only not effectively representing me, but in fact are both prolonging my stay and furthering my misery. I wonder should the situation be reversed, and you were effectively kidnapped and held for ransom, what part of your integrity would you allow to be stolen from you in your "defense"? What part of your honesty would you allow exorcised? What part of your life?

If you have no respect for me, we indeed do have a problem. But if you do not have any respect for me, it is because you have not tried to look at the man who is in front of you. I would be because you have not listened to my words, or allowed the realities of my life to exist. And if you have even for moment demanded this from me, without asking, and in this way reserving power on your part, this division is equally harmful to my case. And furthermore, if you have done this, and if you have done so because you are already willing and ready to dismiss your performance as bad because you really had no heart to back me because you think I am this "undesirable thing", then simply know this: this would be your failing, and not a fault of mine or the situation. And, you also should really understand one very, very important truth of my world: In my mind, my desire to invite you to my world is far, far more important to me than your invitation to me. My ideas of what constitutes good and bad people most probably have a far more rigorous background than yours do. My ideas of what makes a person relevant probably have nothing to do with the world that you are living in. And I have been invited to some pretty big parties in this little life of mine.

I genuinely think you should consider this thing I have said to you here quite carefully. I am having great problems with our association at this point, and I really feel you wish to leave because you think you are in fact "saving face". But I do have every intention of publishing this and every other letter, correspondence and paper of this case. I would like to think that in the courtroom of public opinion, that the faces of the people who actually are supposed to be with me in this case are indeed of the socially acceptable variety, and this goes directly to the idea of trust, honesty and integrity. I believe if I should be forced to, there would be time to do all of this again. I believe I could find another lawyer, free of charge, because I believe if what I am saying is in fact the truth, that you would have given me good reason to believe you could not continue in this job.

But do know this: if we part here, the real reality of the situation is not that you had no faith in a bad client, but that you did not represent your clients interests well out of a sense of prejudice and fear of your opposition. And that you allowed to exist a feeling in the court of erroneous and malicious misrepresentation, and all only to my detriment. And by doing so, you would have in fact contributed to an opposition that in all reality, is supporting a liar, a cheat, a thief and one who is practicing these social diseases from a position of social trust. Or in other words, a really, really socially unacceptable guy.

I not only think that my life is relevant, but I think the standards by which I live far, far exceed anything that any country ever asks of its citizens. And what is more, I do not only say this, I believe I have physically proven this beyond anybody’s ability to doubt. And, in regards to our relationship, either you simply understand this, or you do not. There is no middle ground. None. If you can’t sell me, frankly, you are working for the other side.

So tell me how you feel about this, what you have in mind for the remaining part of our defense and what you think we should do. Or if you have no heart for this and that I must do what I must do to restart, tell me this as well. I am starting to feel that the evidence is starting to become rather clear, but I want it to be like crystal; like a perfect diamond. I want it to sing, know what I mean? In Belarus they say that the truth can poke you in the eye. I want these people blinded. Are you feeling me? You know, like a real biker would?

Adam

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:14:
Adam,

You force me to take part in the e-discussion instead of having a meeting with me
Which could help us to refresh the atmosphere. In our situation the face-to-face conversation is necessary and what you do makes potentially not a very big problem a huge one. You wanted to know my opinion on your statements. I will give you the short one: I believe you have good intentions but find your judgments unconsientious and unjust to me. I will not develop this thought because I believe we should direct our energy somewhere else.

I love my profession. I feel deeply engaged in your case. Therefore I renew m invitation to have a face-to-face meeting in the soonest possible term. I am out of
Warsaw on Monday but Tuesday's, Wednesday’s and Thursday's terms proposed by me remain valid.

Regards,


Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:03:52 -0800 (PST)


Marcin,

This is a political statement. And I do not live in Warsaw and it is quite inconvenient and unnecessarily expensive to go there...

E-discussions are cheap, and they can be had without interruption.

My actions are great. What I have done is to defend myself against your country for more than half a year for a crime I did not commit. My simple point is that we take this tactic, and do every last possible thing to drive this point home, and this is by exploiting the obvious reality that the only witness for the other side has lied and is not a competent witness, and that I have been greatly damaged by this episode. I am quite tired of what seems to me to be perpetual and perhaps cultural accusation in the tone and approach of people. To get it from you from a supposed position of trust does not indicate to me that you are deeply anything.

I have asked you sever e-questions in three long letters and you are, perhaps judiciously, not answering them. This may be quite politically astute for you, but it also effectively leaves me, your client in the dark.

I have several suggestions I have wanted to make to you, but I feel that because you are avoiding me, for whatever reason you are I can not speak with you. And, this is my case, because I am the only one with a vested interest in it. I wish to press, now. I wish to make financial claims, now, and I wish to call attention to the real charges that should be placed on the head of Zareba, now. If it is completely out of form to do this, let us suggest. If it is wrong to this, then as a complaint. If I am not mistaken, there are quite a few people who were supposed to speak in the upcoming days, and I need to feel some sense of knowing about all of this. And this is communication.

To have said to me what you said to me on the bus is both weakening to me in reality, and possibly a smokescreen to me, keeping me from the real necessities of defense in probability. Both are unacceptable. Both weaken my sense of trust.

I’ll wait for this response. I really hope I am not required to come to this hearing on Thursday. The only reason I wouldn't be because I have faith and trust in your word. If I don't have this, I must be there, and not only to defend myself, but to protect myself from your disallowing the return of my passport by your actions. I would like an understanding of the protocol of this hearing. Who will be there and what will be discussed. I want to know if people can speak there, and what the form and order would be to do so. And to this effect, I have stated what I believe to be great reasons why there was a mistake in the beginning at an earlier version of this trial, as to why I had not been even allowed to defend myself at that hearing. If these reasons are not heard, and if you do not present them for me, I would have to present them myself.

Adam

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:30:46 +0100
From: "Sylwester Pieckowski


We are out of this.
SP

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:53:10 -0800 (PST)

Sylwester Pieckowski

The point is that you weren't in this... I will go to the hearing on Thursday because I have to represent myself and I will also go to the courts and ask for a new attorney based upon the reasons listed in the previous letters. Your man Borus attempted to make agreements on my behalf in court without consultation with me that, to the best of my understanding had no other effect but to eliminate evidence from our side. He did not allow for an understanding of the potential of a mistrial based upon the translator Twardowski also being a potential witness in the beginning even though this information was presented to him on the first day. And, he has allowed me to come unprepared to trial dates because he gave no preparation for what could be expected or asked for during Zareba’s testimony. I will give all of these as reasons. And as a whole, I feel that your company had no real interest in this case from the beginning based directly on your personal statement to me: we make no money from this case, the money we get from the courts is a pittance: we have no interest in this case.

Adam Goodman

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 04:17:59 -0800 (PST)
Dear Sirs,

Would you please accommodate me in the following ways:

1: Would you please provide me with the time, place and room number for the hearing this Thursday regarding my passport. I have checked my notebook and I find that it is not printed there for some reason.

2: On that Thursday, I would like you to have my documents, motions and papers or copies of them ready to be returned to me. I will have very little time that day, and will probably come to your offices after the session. So if you can have these things ready with the secretary, I would greatly appreciate this.

3. Please allow a simple acknowledgment of receipt of this letter to be returned to this E-mail address.

Thank you in advance for this and for any efforts you have made on my behalf in the past.

Adam Goodman

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:52:44 +0100
Dear Mr. Goodman,

Your decision is duly acknowledged and we will follow accordingly.

The next hearing at the Circuit Court will take place on Thursday at 10:00. More details on it will be passed to you by Marcin Boruc later tonight or tomorrow morning.

Best Regards,

Sylwester Pieckowski

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:11:31 +0100

Adam,

The closest Circuit (higher) Court's session (regarding your passport) will take place on Thursday, Dec. 19, 10 A.M, room 410 (floor 4). The court is located near American Embassy, at the corner of Szopena (Chopin) Str. and Ujazdowskie Av.

I will have the documentation required by you with me.

Regards,
MB

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:38:42 -0800 (PST)
Um, I got a letter from your boss saying something like "we're outa here"... this means to me that your firm has decided to resign. If this is the case, what are your plans in regards to Thursday? I have already done quite a bit of work with that in mind. Could you clarify this for me?


Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:45:34 +0100
I have already told you this. I will represent your interests on Thursday (unless,
Of course, you do not object to this during the coming session).

Your decision to participate in the Thursday's session came rather late. The court does not know about it. It means that I will have to try to provide the presence of the sworn translator and I will do it.

Regards,


Marcin Boruc

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:10:53 -0800 (PST)
From: "Adam Goodman"
I will need to see the text or at least have a translation of everything you plan to say and the form of the meeting. I will not be able to stay long at the meeting because I must leave before too long. I have prepared a letter I wish to present there. I am afraid I can not permit you to enter at all unless I know exactly what you will say, good or bad. I am afraid I have been made quite uncomfortable by this arrangement. Your statements to me on the tram, your refusal to acknowledge any of my letters in a complete way and your evasion of direct questions makes you quite suspect in this. And, especially in regards to the actions made directly against me by my last attorney, this situation is unacceptable. You are forcing me into an uncomfortable and unnecessary situation and into doing a large amount of extra work in a short amount of time. None of this is in any way appreciated.

I will need the above mentioned items today, or I would ask you not to attend at all and simply make all of my papers available to me for Thursday morning before the hearing. I am afraid I have no other choice. I feel that there needs to be a bond of trust between client and attorney, and this exchange and all of our meetings over the last few weeks and during the last sessions are quite the opposite of this. I do not wish to be insulting to you sir, but in my mind, I feel you are playing games with a situation that I am afraid I regard as far more serious then you may expect. I really don't know who or what you think I am, or what you think appropriate attorney/client behavior might be, but this is simply unsatisfactory and quite possibly bordering on some kind of threat. If I don't trust you to represent my best interests, you simply are not doing so.

I’ll expect this information from you presently.


Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:58:04 +0100


By accident I have sent you an e-mail containing spelling mistakes. Here is a repaired version of it:

Adam,

The frames of the coming session are set by my complaint, which was sent to you. I am going to develop the argumentation given there and to present new argumentation based on the events which happened during the last District Court's hearing (referring to Zareba's incredibility and therefore the weakness of the whole accusation and the great probability that finally you will be found not guilty). I would also like to add that because of our visa regulations in fact even if they give your passport back you will have no chance to leave Poland before next District Court's session.

I would like you to be aware that the procedure does not allow you to act without attorney. So if there is no attorney representing you on Thursday's session the Court will not be able to conduct the session and will have to adjourn it.

Regards, MB

Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:02:30 +0100 From: "Marcin Boruc" To: suchalife19@yahoo.com CC: pieckowskis@warsaw.altheimer.pl Subject: Re: edited letter to the courts

Adam,

Enclosed please find a letter I am going to file tomorrow with the Court. It is the motion for taking evidence from your last letter, which is being cited by me in the whole without any changes. Your letter is good, although it is very sad thing to read what you wrote about our relationship. If you are not going to appear in the Court - please inform Mr. Twardowski about this.

Regards, Marcin Boruc

Altheimer & Gray Polska ul. Emilii Plater 53 00 - 113 Warszawa Polska (Poland) tel.: (48-22) 5205000 fax :(48-22) 5205001

(Note: The text of this letter has its own page. Please see the “Letter to the higher Court” in the essays section of the HOMEPAGE.)

Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:45:48 +0100 From: "Marcin Boruc" To: suchalife19@yahoo.com CC: pieckowskis@warsaw.altheimer.pl Subject: Re: Holiday Greetings from Eastern Europe

Well, it was a surprise to get the greetings. I also wish you all the best. Enclosed please find to letters, which will be filed with the lower court tomorrow:
1) the motion for revival of the term for filing the complaint against the lower court's decision of Oct. 11 regarding your passport (the decision which made the higher court to refuse, during their session of Dec. 19, to deal with my complaint + the motion for releasing us from the obligation to defend you;
2) 2) The complaint against the lower court's decision of Oct. 11.

Regards, MB

Both letters are in Polish- I am not going to bother showing them.


Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 13:46:10 +0100
Adam,

Today I have contacted both lower and higher courts in order to determine the status of your case after our motion for releasing us from the obligation to defend you.

This motion remains undecided by the lower court (which is the only competent to do so). They could not do it without the files, which has been sent TODAY to them by the higher court.

The above means that you have no chance for a new lawyer appointed by the court before the coming hearing.

Therefore, I will have to take part in this hearing. My objective, however, will be only to receive the relief from the obligation to defend you and to gain the revival of the term for filing the complaint against the lower court's decision of Oct. 11,
2002 regarding your passport.

I would like to support me in both matters.

Regards,



Marcin Boruc

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:45:04 -0800 (PST) my only interest in the matters of form in regards to the witnesses that have been called to the next session. I am a bit unclear as to who is supposed to show and who isn't on my side. To this moment, I still have not read or understood your statements to the lower court in regards to the motions that you have made. I only know that we have reserved the right to call Twardowski and the daughter. I am unclear as to whether the daughter will appear or not, and if there is any obligation on her part to do so. And also, I know what questions I have for her, but I am a little worried about being stifled by the court. So I guess I would like some advice about this. I also do not know what you have done as far as contacting others who would have been witnesses. This includes the bike mechanic and the biker(s).

I am also unclear as to the benefit of the request to the higher court regarding my passport. When they refused to hear our argument, it was because of the date that it was submitted. I believe we could simply make a new request now as it is after the term of the two months. However, I am not sure it even matters, as I believe this trial is coming to a conclusion. There simply isn't that much left to say in my mind. So I would like to know the truth about this as well.

So, if you wouldn't mind some simple free advice concerning these matters, and perhaps a few words as to what I could expect format wise in this coming trial, I would have no problem allowing you to do what you want. However, your firm's release is different from you making any motions on my behalf, and as I have already stated, I truly do not understand the whole of it. I will be here on line right now until perhaps 11:30 or so, so, if it is not too much trouble we can back and forth a bit if you are available. We could even "chat" if this makes it quicker. onet.pl works pretty good from where I am sitting.

Adam

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 02:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Ok, it looks like we didn't speak. I will check this e-mail this afternoon at about what I have written to you. However, it is my feeling that you should not represent me in any way concerning any more motions without my consent. I am hoping that this e-mail makes this clear that because of our history, there is great mistrust on my part for your firm. So because of this, even if it is the right thing to do, I do not think I can agree with what you want to do regarding my passport. However, regarding your desire to be released from your obligation, I have already filed a document with the court agreeing with this idea and giving my own reasons why I do not wish to continue with you. I really would rather not go to Warsaw for the hearing on the 5th. I simply can not afford the time or the money for these trips.

Should you be able to answer my last mail by three, perhaps there is another way, but as of this moment, I cannot do as you ask. I am sending a copy of this letter to others as well. Thank you for informing me.


Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 11:28:41 +0100

Adam:

1) The only witness the Court decided to summon is the daughter. She can not be forced to appear in the court. The other person the Court decided to summon is a psychologist whose role is to assist the daughter's testimony and to evaluate its credibility.
If you present me the list of your questions to the daughter I am ready to review it and, if necessary, to make it acceptable by the Court.

2) Last time the Court announced that:
- their only decision regarding my motions for evidence is to summon the daughter and psychologist and to ask the Police for the bike inspection protocol of May 17;
- will make their decision on the remaining motions (including the bike mechanic, the biker (s), Mr. Twardowski, Tatiana, your "book" about the case, your bike) during the coming hearing.

3) I know that it is almost impossible that the lower court decides to give you the passport back. Much bigger chance to achieve this goal is to convince the higher court.

There are two ways to make the higher court formally able to make such a decision:
- to revive the term for filing the complaint against the decision of Oct. 1;
- to stop filing motions for the passport with the lower court till February 6,
2002.

There are two main benefits of choosing first possibility: time and additional pressure on the lower court to change their position in this matter.

Time is a very important factor. If you want to push all the motions for the evidence filed by me so far - the trial will not finish very soon.

Marcin Boruc

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 02:43:00 -0800 (PST)

Ok, well, thank you for this... but it is interesting that there is only this one piece of business to be done on the eighth... why has the court not agreed to call the other witnesses? Is this stalling? What is happening that we must have their agreement just to present their case? I am afraid I do not understand this at all.

Have the others been called? Have we made any attempts to tell the others to come to court? May I bring in my bike and simply present the evidence? And that "book" of mine was submitted several months ago. Is there some reason it is not a part of this proceeding? Can you tell me why these things are the way they are and why am I hearing about this in January?

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 02:59:41 -0800 (PST)
Ok... I really have to go. I guess my feelings are that I really have no understanding of the things you are telling me and what it sounds like is that all of this is simply dragging me along for an even longer ride that it has been already. I feel that this is a big mess, and I do not agree with you at all. So, if you must go to the court to make your claim to remove yourself as council, you not only have my blessing, but my request to do so. However, I am prohibiting you from passing any more papers or making any more motions on my behalf as of this moment. Do not make any requests regarding my case, nor offer any opinions. If you have done anything since the hearing on the nineteenth, I am afraid I shall make objection to it on the grounds that we have had no relationship since before that time. It is genuinely my opinion that I have made an enormous mistake in having you speak for me at that hearing. I simply cannot make these mistakes any more.

I will send a copy of this letter to the courts at my next opportunity. Thank you for your help in the past.

Adam Goodman


Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 12:07:05 +0100
Adam:

1) Of course the court hearing is set for the eighth, not for the fifth. The worst thing you could do in your situation is not to appear in the Court.

2) It is the Court who decides which evidence should be accepted and when. For example it is possible that your "book" will never be found as an evidence.

3) I repeat: the only people (apart you, Zareba, me and the prosecutor) summoned to the coming hearing is the daughter + psychologist.
It would be pointless and even rude to take the non-summoned witnesses and the bike into the courtroom.

The court is the decision-maker. Even my position in this case finally depends only on them (not on me or you). In theory it is even possible that we will not be released from the obligation to defend you.

Therefore I have to appear in the court. It is my duty even if you don't want me to do so.

Regards,
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 12:07:05 +0100
Done.



Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:53:37 -0800 (PST)
Borus,

Well, I guess I have a few things on my mind today that I wanted to talk to you about first. I have some ideas about complaints and about tactics that I think I want you to consider. But you see the problem is that one of the complaints that I have is that I do not seem to be able to complain. I really don’t know how many times I have gone to the prosecutor or to my other attorney, or in meetings and begged to make a counter complaint against Zareba. Yesterday's being evicted from the room when the daughter gave her story was a perfect example. This as well as being ignored (you and me both) as to my ability to defend myself. I am also thinking today about a counter suit against him against him for his keeping me here.

And also, there is another day's facts to deal with. I didn’t go to the secretary’s office after the case to get copies of everything... anyway, I want to talk to you about some of these things. I will be here and on line till about 11:00 or so if you can chat a bit, or we can back and forth a little. So, this is the stuff I want to talk about, and to get copy of your draft as well.

Adam




Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:30:02 -0800 (PST)


Ok, I will have this read as soon as I can and I will get back to you as soon as I can. I am thinking about withdrawing all motions for evidence at this time save the reading of my book and the showing of my bike and one witness. Is there a possibility that we can end this thing at or before the end of this?

Also, may I apply for a decision in this case based upon the evidence already presented, and/or at least apply for a dismissal of charges based upon lack of evidence and or evidence of the false nature of Zareba’s claim? Are these things possible? And also, how do I prepare for what is to come next both with and without these things I m talking about? I guess I have a piece of writing to do today. I made a first draft of an essay about this subject I’m going to be mailing out, so I will be here online until about 11:00 today (Friday).

Oh, and the final thing, is there some way to get my hands on copies of the courts papers from the sessions since the court trial has been started? Are these available in my case file and can I get copies of them made? Do I need your help for this? I hope we can talk today because I have no internet over the weekend, so we won't be able to move until Monday at all for anything, so I hope you can help to clear this stuff up for me, if you can, today.

Thanks,

Adam


Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:03:43 +0100
Mr. Goodman:

1) You and me are entitled to receive the copies of any of the papers collected in the court files. However, for me it would be practically much easier than for you. I can arrange the copies you are interested in on Monday.

2) We are free to change/withdraw each of our motions for evidence on any stage of the proceeding (for example during the next hearing). It means it is possible to apply for a judgment upon the evidence already presented (unless the prosecutor, Zareba or the Court itself decides to take some additional evidence). Therefore, in theory, it is possible to close the case next time but I don't believe it actually could happen. This is why I would like to convince you not to surrender in the battle for your passport.

3) The court ordered that the psychologist should submit his opinion about the daughter's testimony within 2 weeks and decided to urge the Police on delivery of the bike inspection protocol or an information regarding this matter.

4) The contents of the next hearing will be as follows:
- issues mentioned in point 3 above;
- a decision regarding the remaining motions for evidence;
- taking additional, oral opinion from the psychiatrists who examined you in the course of the prosecutorial proceeding and gave their written opinion on you.




The decisions regarding the remaining motions… (Note: This part of the letter is lost.)
Marcin Boruc



Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:55:08 -0800 (PST)
Ok... excuse me for not writing earlier, but I had some real difficulties this weekend to go along with the lack of internet time. I will be on line tomorrow morning at about nine am, and I will have a few more things o say before I want to submit this document to the courts.

However, I would like to pose one question to you now: I am not understanding of why we are dealing with Tomczech, my previous attorney. What was sent to him, and where does our not getting something from the court mean that we can apply for the passport back now, and how is this different from the issue of the two month waiting period that we short changed in the higher court a few weeks ago? Is there some reason that we couldn't simply resubmit that claim? Anyway, I guess I sort of understand "reviving the term" but I don't really understand what is up with the previous lawyer...

I will be here tomorrow, I really hope we can swap a few ideas then.

Adam



Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:35:04 +0100
1) I have ordered the copies from the court files. They promised to prepare it for Wednesday.

2) The Court's decision of Oct. 11, 2002 was made during its unpublic session. So nobody could hear it. In such situations decisions should be delivered by mail. The date of such delivery is the first day of the period for filing potential complaint (which is 7 days).

The judge ordered such delivery of the decision of Oct. 11, 2002. My objection is to prove that despite of this the decision of Oct. 11 was not delivered. Mr. Tomczyk was your attorney till Oct. 22, 2002 (Mr. Pieckowski was appointed as your new lawyer on this date).

3) The construction of my motion is alternative, i.e. I want the higher court to decide that the complaint has been filed within 7 days from the day of its delivery
(Feb. 8, 2003) and, if not, I want the higher court to revive the term for filing the complaint.

4) I have filed the motion with the Court an hour ago. If you decide that you don't want it - I will withdraw it.

Regards,




Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 01:35:14 -0800 (PST)
Ok... so what was this higher court speaking about at this secret session? Was this about the indictment? What session could they have had about me that I was not privy to? What were they talking about?

And how does this get my passport back?

I have been thinking about the whole of the situation and my feeling is (and I know this is obvious) but the whole of this has been remarkably prejudiced. There are enough small facts along the way, that if they are added to my being removed from the court during the last session when we heard the girl speak, the refusal of he judge to listen to my statements at the beginning, their turning down of our desires to part company and, that they have done nothing but greatly prejudiced a wrongful case against me. And Zareba is a prosecutor in this! And this is in the face of great evidence that the original complaint was at the least greatly tainted by lies, or better that the guy who made the complaint outright lied as to the condition of the car as well as himself (his teeth), I am thinking that I am in a position right now to file a fairly vast monetary suit for damages. I mean, not only does all of this seem to support my claim as to the slanders and lies of Zareba, but also that the court (the state) has indeed contributed. And, because at this moment, we seem to be having a great fruition of some piece work I had done in my life, this case is now affecting not only my past, but also my future an in more ways than I had originally thought. So beyond what I should really be hoping is a growing obviousness of recognition concerning my personal character, possibly even enough to permeate the rock like consciousness of those I have been forced to sit with all of these many months, this case is becoming a detriment to something that is becoming an even better future then I had originally hoped for. And, one that is a bit more public than I would have originally thought. Any thoughts about simply beginning the suit?

And on this point of extortion, I don't know if this thought will help any, but I did have a deal I thought I wanted to make that I think I spoke with my previous attorney about. I haven't thought of it in a while, but I thought I would voice it to you to hear what your opinion of it is do you think Zareba would fold if he were to get a personal recommendation from me not to jail him? My real feelings are that jail is a complete waist of anybody’s time. I feel that an adequate punishment for him would be to lose his license and be forced to change his job. To put him in jail does his family no good whatsoever, any matter how dirty he might actually be in real life. If he would back off I would be quite happy to make my recommendation known. He doesn't drive, carry a gun or wear a badge. But he should be allowed to work and look after his family. I mean, he does have a little girl to help raise. Right? Any opinions about this?

Now, I do accept your turning in the papers with an option to withdraw. But my personal feeling though is that you should have waited simply because even as of this moment I am not completely clear, and in addition to this, even though it is slightly more work, you do seem to be able to produce English with enough clarity and speed to at least be able to give me something close to a translation of these papers you wish to file. It has become really difficult for me to deal with polish court documents because I do not reveal my Warsaw reality to my students and my Russian friends can not handle the legal polish.

And finally, on a private note, I got a call from Tatyana this morning early. It turns out that the people from the theatre, including the author of the current play, which is being performed, came to look for her. She has been avoiding going to the theatre out of some sense of fear of the unknown, but them coming to her made her the star of the store where she works. So the production is underway, and seriously Marcin, I really do not feel that he state of Poland’s little game of defending this peasant cop's lies needs to include damaging my artistic future as well? I really want go and be a part of this. I have been writing plays and wanting to do what I am doing for a long, long time. And I been into this production for almost a year of my life now. Anyway to get this point through to these people. Bez extortion fees! Anyway to get through to these people?

I’ll check in tomorrow.

Adam


Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:51:42 +0100


1) The criminal proceedings allows that in some situations the court is able to make one-judge-not public decisions. Of course the parties should be informed about such decisions. Such a situation took place on. Oct. 11, 2002. This was only one judge issuing the decision (accidental, not involved in your trial, appointed to make only one decision - the one referring to your motion for your passport. There was no discussion - he based only on the documents.

2) The higher court stated only that the decision regarding your passport had been made on Oct. 11 and that this fact had negative procedural impact on our complaint against the next (of Oct. 31) decision regarding this matter.

3) I decided to file the papers before hearing from you because:
- I am absolutely sure that my plan can be very helpful for you and can have only positive effects;
- I am limited by procedural terms;
- It was convenient for me to be at the courts on Monday;
- I did not receive your comments for which I had been waiting till Monday 2.30 PM.

4) I do not understand your question : "Do you think Zareba would fold (...)". But please understand that this case is the case against you. There is no chance for punishing Zareba within your case. To do so we would need another, criminal and civil, cases against him. To instigate such cases effectively you have to win your case first.

5) The only thing we can do to speed up the moment you can leave Poland is to fight for your passport.

I will inform you about getting of the copies I ordered for you.
Last time in the higher court I gave you back the papers received from you. I would like to regain the copy of the psychiatric opinion regarding you before the next lower court's hearing (the psychiatrist will develop their written opinion orally during the hearing)




Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 00:56:40 -0800 (PST)

Marcin

I don't think I have a copy of this. I know that the end result was that they said I was angry that I was hit by a car and that there is no particular... anything else about me. I remember the prosecutor reading this another way to me. He said that the report said I am a little crazy, but I simply didn't see where it said that anywhere. But the copy of this is in the court files is it not? So, I will look through what I have and if I find this I will give it to you, but I don't remember that I ever made a copy of this. But on the subject of getting these court papers, is there some way to meet without my having to go to Warsaw to pick these things up? Are you planning on heading to Bialistock this weekend?

Onward...

Ok, so the decision of that court was only about the passport. Ok, fine. All of this is nothing but a technicality that we are trying to use to exploit another askance for relief from this false prosecution, right? Wonderful. But while we are waiting for a moment of mercy from a greatly prejudiced court, lets talk about this suit against Zareba and what all that I was talking about in yesterdays letter.

I think that there is enough evidence right now in the court files that would show that Zareba made a false claim against me. This and the lawsuit he filed would also be false based upon his admitting that he lied about the previous condition of the car. The change of stories and the daughters admittance of "needing to defend" her father, I would think also shows that this is so. I would further think it would be a crime to file a false report against somebody. Not only slander, but also in some righteous sense, assault. And, I would think that to ask for money on a false claim would also be a crime...perhaps extortion is a good word for this. So if this is true, the final judgement in this case is no longer the only thing I need in order to proceed against Zareba or the state. And I think this because regardless what the judge says at the eventual end of this case, these facts would still be true.

Now, if also what I said yesterday about the prejudiced nature of this trial is true, then something must be done to balance out this prosecution. Now, in the beginning, there was a choice that was made by the prosecutor and/or by the cops at the station to agree with Zareba’s stories (now proven false) and to disagree with mine. But, as the evidence has changed (along with Zareba’s story) there should be a re-looking into what claims should indeed be made. Why should I be forced to wait this part of the trial out, especially when the court that is trying me has no mercy for me or my situation in terms of the amounts of time they feel they can hold me. I mean, saying that I must wait a month simply for a court date of fifteen minutes when the full weight of the trial has shown nothing but that the driving force of the complaint was a liar and a thief is... outrageous to me. And I simply do not see that they will change any time soon. And more than this, I have been told by my other attorney and by you that in Poland, the courts do not feel that they have to prove a case "beyond a shadow of a doubt" (American jurisprudence-read: "I am innocent until proven guilty») but that they feel they can grab elements out of the claim simply to apply SOME idea of guilt. And the guy who is wrecking my life and the lives of my people is a cop. and not only a cop, but also a cop with a vested interest in avoiding his own prosecution.

So if this is true, and, if a good defense is a good offence, I am not seeing any reason why we simply cannot, finally start the argument against the other man. I mean, I am not seeing that the end of this case does anything but end this case. I do not see any action being taken on the part of anybody against Zareba if we don't start this first. I guess I see this as more than just the truth because as you are saying, we have nothing to bargain with but my time, my money and my life. And this, is exactly what I have been saying has been happening since the beginning. I gain, or would have gained nothing from the arbitrary assault of a man who life would be defined as one lived in abject poverty by the economic standards of my own county. But his is greatly enhanced by any relationship with me, legal, or illegal...so, all of this AND, you are telling me that they don't even read the damned letters I send them without a motion!!!!! Let’s go get the bastard already.

Perhaps philosophically, this is about defining crimes and criminals. Perhaps it is about passivity and about some claim, made by a liar, as to the criminal violent nature of my life (I am on trial for what?) but, to simply sit here and have fingers pointed at me, endlessly and without relief or remorse in the face of all we have heard from this "ham" is to exist in denial that is patently and exclusively a part of the people who are holding me. why the hell can't I simply take copies of the reports to the police and ask them to arrest this guy on the charges of filing a false report and extortion? why not? I think, that at the least the admittance in court as to the previous damage to his car should do more than simply cast a doubt as to his character, I would think that what it does is point to a specific lie: he said I was responsible for damages to his car: I was not. That original fact, the original claim, and this is according to him, is simply no longer true.

So in the end, do you really think there is a more "bottom" bottom line than this? My feeling is that this is called kidnapping.... Kidnapping and nothing else, because when you abduct someone from their life, hold them prisoner and ask them for money, this is kidnapping. Or extortion... I think we have enough to prove both. Tell me again why we shouldn't or can't do this.

AND, I have a goddamned play that is starting in Belarus and according to my girl there, we have a lot of nervous actors getting ready to try and deal with three language play... they need my time and my help and I want to give this to them. This is, more than technically, an international thing. It is a big deal, publicly and privately. Get it? Isn’t it about time we got these people to wake up and smell the coffee...

Adam



Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 03:09:41 -0800 (PST)


Marcin,

I didn't get a response from you about my letter yesterday. I guess I really need you to know that I am quite serious about all of this and that I am really interested in what you have to say about this Idea of pressing for the lawsuit now. These last few months have been quite difficult for me. They have been filled with a lot really terrible intrigues that have all been perpetrated only at my expense and solely as I can see for the purposes of prolonging the criminal career of a dirty, lying, chlop cop (A “chlop” in Polish is an idiot, a natural.) And I feel that these intrigues have come from both sides of the fence, as I am sure you are aware of. And so I really do hope that I have made my point clearly in that I really do wish to take proactive action and I really do wish to get going back to my real world to help get things back together. This life of perpetual extortion Poland seems content to leave me in, is not a good way for a man to live...

Is there some way to get these ideas through to the other side short of beginning some massive (and public) lawsuit based of the hard evidence we have already accumulated? Is there some reason we simply can not put the hammer down here in some way as to get the message across? Can we at the least, help propagate some message that Poland (and I am only talking from the stand-point of Polish reklama) does NOT in any way support the criminal activities of it's police force? I think this would be a good idea... for a change, don’t you? Because as far as I can see, the corruption, like a bad cancer is pretty much through and through. But be that as it may, it still doesn’t change the simple fact that this "wiezniak" (Another word for fool- it was a great moment for me when I learned this because of the relationship to the prosecutor’s name.) cop lied in his reports, filed a false claim against me, and has led a harassment against me now for almost nine months.

So perhaps nine months is enough for any human to be incubated. Perhaps I am ready to be let lose in the world. And, if this is a problem here because if I left there would be a void of some kind left here by my absence (and by this I mean that perhaps Poland really believes that it needs a good scapegoat to play it’s ego games with), we could always use this “ham” (Third word- same as the others) as a target for a change. I know he is not “rich” or smart or handsome... or American or fat or Jewish, or any of the other great themes of prejudice and abuse y’all like to live off of here, but I think he would be fine for the role... I mean, he could always just pretend he was somebody, right?

Waiting for your response,

Adam


Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:30:35 +0100

Sorry for not responding at once. I am extremely busy. Tomorrow I am leaving Warsaw for a business trip.

I got the copies of all the court hearing’s minutes. I can send you it by the messenger on Monday if you give me your address.

I am sure that I gave you back the psychiatric report. Please have it with you during the next hearing.

I took part in several trials in which children where witnesses. In all this cases the accused had to leave the courtroom. Therefore the situation with you is nothing very special and I think you reached much too far going conclusions.

It is possible to instigate both criminal and civil cases against Zareba but there is no doubt that both of them would be immediately suspended until the very end of your case (both of such cases depend on the result of your case). So instigation of such cases would not be effective. It would not have any influence on your case, too.
Another issue is that our firm is not interested in representing you in any other case.

Regards,


Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 00:50:53 -0800 (PST)
Well, this is fine, but I would like to start some proceedings weather or not the court would do anything because I believe there is enough evidence in their to support my claims regardless of what the court finally decides about my issues. and I say this specifically in regards to the fact that you and my last attorney have pointed out to me hat the whole of he case is not important to the judges, and that they would content themselves if any part of Zareba’s claim would be true... and all of this is the face of everything.

I wonder then if you would be so kind as to simply help to draw up some complaints. I do feel this is a part of the case and a part of my current defense... and, I don't think it would take too much time. If you could be so kind as to simply tell me how it is done and what sort of language I need to use to have it read, I think I would like to press... and I especially would like to know if there is any restrictions against going to the police, or would I have to go directly to a prosecutor?

Adam


Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 02:11:33 -0800 (PST)
Did you receive my last e-mail?

I will do what I can about getting those papers as soon as possible from you... and, I am using my friend Marcin's address now. So, I want to press charges and I want to talk about he definitive points we want to make here at what better be the end of this nonsense trial. I feel that all I wish to do is to hit the court with both the ideas of Zareba being a liar the bike is supposed to show this) and that what he has done is both abuse and abuse of power on his (and the courts) part. Other than this, I don't want to waist any more time than necessary. I feel that my friend Marcin can talk about track bikes, the critical mass riot, which I feel was started because of Zareba’s lies about me, about myself, my monetary situation here in Poland and what it is like to be at risk as a biker and hat having some unknown (and unidentified) driver drive his car into you. Also, I think we can bring in, through him some good statistics about bike/car accident and the consequences there-after.

Anyway, all of this, but mostly, I want to be done, as in finished, and in really want to be able to get out to Belarus and help with getting my play underway. This is a really big deal for a lot of people. I have a two-week vacation from the school after this week, and I would really like to go there and be a part of this. I suppose I would like to think that you, with your great skills of logic and persuasion, might be able to get the general idea through to the courts that holding me back from my life is an ongoing act of assault and damage. And, that all things considered, that it is as concrete as it can possible get that Zareba lied in his reports, perhaps we can finally turn the phrase "highly likely" in the proper direction for a change.

Adam

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:23:04 +0100
If you want to try to instigate the criminal case against Zareba you should provide
The police or a prosecutor a report of a crime (crimes). It is possible to do it orally or in writing. It is not necessary that this is you who do this; it can be anybody who knows or suspects that the crime was committed and has at least basic knowledge about the relevant facts (this information can help you to eliminate the problem of the language barrier).

In our circumstances the best solution would be that you (or/and somebody else) file a report of Zareba's crimes with the Prosecutory Office which conducted your case (i.e. Prokuratura Rejonowa Warszawa Srуdmiescie, ul. Krucza 38/42, 00 - 512 Warszawa). (Note: This is of course Wiesniakowski’s office)

There are no formal requirements regarding the contents of a report of a crime but I advice you to have the following elements in it:

1) Date;
2) The name and the address of the Procecutory Office;
3) The data referring to the person who signs the report (name, contact). If you want to sign the paper personally - please mark that you are an American citizen and to not know Polish);
4) Title, ex.: "the report of a crime committed by the police officer";
5) Essence, i.e. brief, very concrete description of the events proving that several crimes could be (were) committed.
You could start this with the information that you are accused in the court case conducted by Sad Rejonowy dla Warszawy Srуdmiescia, ref. number of which is II K
2589/02, and that the case was previously conducted by this Prosecutory Office (ref. no:
7 Ds 2559/02/IV) and that the case against you is a result of and involves several crimes conducted by Zareba, who plays roles of auxiliary prosecutor, civil plaintiff and witness.
Continuously you should describe the facts and present the evidence proving that
Zareba committed crimes like false testimony, false accusation, reporting on a crime, which was not committed, extortion, assault.


Regards,

You can try to file such a report in English but of course Polish would be, from the practical point of view, much better (it would not create the problems which for sure will arise when you file the English version).

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:40:32 +0100
By "contact" (point 2) I mean particularly an address for correspondence


Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:07:49 +0100
On Jan. 13 I have filed with the court the letter containing the motions regarding your passport; we have discussed this issue. Yesterday I visited the court secretariat in order to determine the status of those motions and I discovered that this paper did not reach the files (they "lost" it like the previous one). In such a situation sent the copy of the lost document by fax and was promised that the files will be sent to the higher court immediately.

Regards, MB


Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:19:03 -0800 (PST)
I just mailed Marcin for his address, which is the one I use for mail... I will try to get to you as soon as I can to exchange papers with you. Do you know the courts schedule for the next three weeks? Are they closing for the holidays like the schools are? I guess I have been feeling the urge to turn in some comments to them...

And, would you be so kind as to help with this police/prosecutor/arrest thing. And, would you mind passing something resembling an opinion as to what you think would both come of it and what I could expect from it?

in case he is slow to call, Marcin’s e-mail (my address) is: drazek@…

And finally, aside from pressing charges and begging the higher courts to awaken, is there any thing else that I can do to get my point across and to make this thing really stop? I am out of my mind right now wanting to get back with my people. Too much is happening right now there and this has become more than torture for me to be held away...really, I there anything?

Adam


Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:18:25 +0100
1) The courts will not have any holidays during the coming three weeks.

2) I have already expressed my opinion about your projects to instigate the proceedings against Zareba. This opinion is that nothing will happen until your case is finished which means your actions on this field will not have any influence on your case.

3) There are only two possibilities:
a) The lower court gives your passport back (and now we can assume that in fact it is highly theoretical possibility);
b) The higher court cancels the lower court's decision (in my opinion we have a quite big chance to achieve this result).

I would like to remind you one important fact I mentioned some time ago. This fact is that your stay in Poland, according to the visa regulations, is illegal. It means that you should obtain Polish visa before leaving Poland which takes time and you want to leave Poland as soon as you regain the passport. I think you should ask your embassy for their assistance in this matter.

Regards,

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:14:47 -0800 (PST)
As far as the visa, Americans do not pay for polish visa's and, if they are not work related, are given freely at the border during any crossing; plane, train, foot, car, bike or bus. If I have been late in leaving, I am not sure the answer is the American embassy. I say this because they have been less than helpful to me in the past concerning this situation. I do believe however that there is a good possibility that I can simply exit and return act, which puts another visa in the book. This may be especially true as it concerns some extended stay in Belarus, a place where I need a stamped, purchased visa to enter and not just an "out and back" to Germany. I think there is a good chance that I can do this without any particular problems. However, I am not convinced that simply talking to the judge who finally agrees to give the passport back about being some... voucher for my situation (and that it was on state related business), wouldn't cancel out any problems I may have at the crossing.

However, aside from the American embassy, you had mentioned in the past that you wanted to help about this visa issue. What other ideas had you come up with?

And, though is am really quite happy to hear from you about these genuinely high possibilities of being allowed to rejoin my life, we are not yet at the actual point of the conclusion of this trial. And, that because I have never been allowed up to this point to file any action, legal or compensatory, I wonder what I would be looking at n terms of actually getting the whole of the situation righted? My thinking is that at least if I was to make what charges there are to make against Zareba, at the least they would be there, on the books, and therefor I would not need to do that process again in the future. And, in addition to this, as I hope if have made clear, I have incurred quite ridiculous losses and accrued debts as a result of all of this. I would really like to be getting on the road towards some real compensation as soon as possible. And so, what is there to do about these things? What can I do, what is there already in place about this? I still don't see how this current trial process will show anything proactive in my direction if I do not do something myself.

And finally, I am asking again, can I get some help from you regarding at least the filing of charges against Zareba?

But, aside from this, really Marcin, I am liking this conversation over the last few days, although, I do feel the snail like speed of this all. However, your words of optimism do bring some warmth to my heart. What would you suppose would be the time frame of this release? Is there any possibility of being able to use my time off from school to go and see about all that is happening there? This would make me (and quite a few other people) quite happy I imagine.

Oh, and did you hook up with Drazek about the address?

Adam


Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:42:06 +0100

** High Priority **

Dear Mr. Goodman,

Please be informed that Mr. Marcin Boruc is away on business trip and will be available on Friday, January 24 or on Monday, January 27, 2003. He will contact you on January 24 or January 27.

Kind regards,

Zuzanna Brachacka
Secretary


Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:51:32 +0100
Hello,

I have promised to Mr. Goodman to provide him via you with the copies of the documents from his court case files. If you could provide me with your address I could send it by a messenger.


Marcin Boruc

>>> Adam Goodman 01/23/03 11:35am >>>

Ok. I understand you have gone out of town. But I just wanted to add one last thing
To my letters of the last few days. I think the real crime here is called
"Defamation of character". I think this is when false accusations are made and the results have a wide-ranging effect over the victim’s entire life, past, present and future. I
Would think this is the single thing that best describes my experiences here in Poland.

I have been in contact with Tatyana. She is... well, she is ok. The play is beginning rehearsals and they are looking for money for the reklama. I told them that I thought there would be more reklama for this play then they could ever have dreamed. They hear this, but you know they like things to be... concrete over there.

I do keep all of these letters you know, so i suppose must wait until your return for your responses from the last few days. Hope your trip has went well.

Regards,

Adam


Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:22:28 +0100

1) Visa problem

If you want to be sure that you will have possibility to come back to Poland in the future - you have to get Polish visa before leaving Poland. There is no doubt about this. Any paper from the court would be able to legalize your stay (it is beside their competence). To start the visa proceeding you need to have your passport physically. Normally the proceeding takes more than a month. I am able to to help you in obtaining it in about 1 week (I have already made some arrangements to achieve such a result).

2) Charges against Zareba

You know my opinion about the idea of instigating any proceeding against Zareba before the very end of your case. There is no doubt that any civil case would be premature. The same refers to possible criminal case however there could be some benefit for you if you decide to act. This benefit is that you can start the case now (when you are in Poland) and the case would live its own life, your support would not be necessary in the future.

I gave you my advice concerning the planned report of crimes committed by Zareba. I would like to add that it is not necessary to name the crimes. Description of the facts would be enough. It must not be very detailed, because you will be able to develop it during the hearings conducted by a prosecutor or the police.
I will not prepare such a report instead of you.

3) Last visit to the court

I have been to the court to determine the status of our last complaint. The files still remain in the lower court and I asked for speeding up the process of delivering it to the higher one. And another news: Mr. Twardowski filed a motion to release him from your case (justification: he thinks he could be found biased).

5) My holidays

I will be out of the country from Feb. 1 to Feb.9.

Regards,


Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:03:14 +0100

I have just sent the documents to Marcin Drakiewicz.


Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:33:37 -0800 (PST)

Ok... so:

1. What is the time frame on getting this passport of mine back?

2.When you say that you see the court as "thinking" this or that, where does this information come from?

3. Is it necessary to be at the next court session? I ask this because there doesn't seem to be anything for me to do as the session is in the evening and only concerns whether or not they will accept any evidence from our side.

4. If they are releasing the passport, what is the bureaucracy involved for them and for me? In other words; what do I have to do?

5. Are there any problems you foresee about this?

6. Do you see any limitations on me after getting my passport back?

7. You say that this visa thing takes a month, but you have reduced this to only a week. What have you done to make the process only a week? Who have you talked to, and what is your "plan"?

8. And, is there anything else involved in this, or are they just going to release the passport? in other words, will there be any other conditions?

9. Is there, or will there be any criminal charges pressed against Zareba by the court without my taking any action myself?

10. What is the procedure I must follow in terms of asking for just compensation of my time?

11. Is there any chance of getting this compensation short of filing a suit?

12. Who do I speak with regarding my situation when you are out of town?

I think this is the list I have got in my head at the moment... I plan on going to Warsaw in a few days. I would really appreciate a little help in getting my side of the argument started. And about that, though I do understand what you have said about this, I am still wanting to hear your "opinion" about filing charges in this. This goes to the questions above concerning this aspect of my situation here, and I would really appreciate hearing what you have to say in this.

Adam


Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:18:30 +0100
Here are the answers to your questions:

1. I have just checked the situation again - your files still remain in the lower court. It means that it is almost impossible that the higher court makes the decision before Feb. 12., but there is a small chance. Tomorrow I will let you know what is the result of my efforts to speed-up the lower court's actions.

Thus, there are 3 possible scenarios involving getting your passport back:
1) The higher court makes the decision before Feb. 12;
2) The lower court decides to give the passport back on Feb. 12;
3) The higher court makes the decision approximately weeks after Feb. 12.

2. I do not know which "thinking" you mentioned. My direct contacts with the court take place only during the hearings and once I had possibility to have an informal chat with the judges. This is the source of my feelings about the court's "thinking". I am in contact with court secretaries, mostly with Ms. Dominika Adamska who deals with your case.

3. It is necessary to be on the next session. There is a possibility that the court will close the trial or make a new decision regarding your passport. Do not forget that the psychiatrists are expected to take part in the session and to present their opinion about your "slightly diminished capacity" during the event of May 15, 2002.

4/5. The court's decision will be executed by the secretary who will have to arrange
the proceeding with the department responsible for keeping it safe. I expect that physically you would obtain your passport one day after the court's decision. Having your passport in hand you should apply for Polish visa in order to avoid the problems in the future.

6. I do not understand the question, I am afraid. I have already written to you about the limitations arising from the visa regulations.

7. Two offices take part in the visa proceeding: Vivodship's Office and the Office for Repatriation and Foreigners. The applications for visa should be filed with the first office; this office issues the decision about the applications for visa. The second office, however, is more important because it is to examine every case and to present its suggestions to the formal decision-maker. I have talked to the officials working for both institutions, for example with Ms. Pieniaїkiewicz working for the residence legalization department in the second office. Now she knows the case. She promised that when I gave her a call that we have filed the application in the first office she will speed - up the transfer of the application to her office and will work on the application beside the que (will treat your case as extremely urgent).

8. The only reasonable condition could be a bail, however now everybody knows you have no money. Therefore I do not predict any conditions.

9. In theory it is possible that the criminal procedure against Zareba starts as a result of the closing of your case as initiative of the prosecutor or even the court. In real life, in the circumstances of your case, it is rather impossible.

10/11. If you want the compensation from Zareba - you should instigate the civil action against him. Such a civil case could be the separate one or be an element of the criminal case against Zareba. The decision on the compensation could be issued on the basis of the decision regarding Zareba's criminal responsibility. It means long proceeding. If you want the compensation from the State - you should start a civil action after your acquittal. However, I think that any claims against the State based on the acquittal by the lower court would be found unacceptable under Polish law.

12. Mr. Sylwester Pieckowski is working next week, so if you have something really urgent - please contact him.

Regards,

Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 07:33:22 -0800 (PST)
Mr. Borus,

Ok, so what you are saying is that I must instigate a case against Mr. Zareba if there is ever to be one. Thank you for giving this opinion. I am disappointed in your opinion about gaining any compensation in this case because is says that indeed, all have or will have turned a blind eye to the reality of this case.

I am a little concerned about any sorts of ideas of diminished capacity coming from any tests I might have had. This was not part of their evidences at first nor have I heard from you that they were being called from the prosecution side. I do not remember making any motions about this nor do I want them to be a part of it. I am quite sure that I do not like these after the fact ideas coming up without request or knowledge on my part. I know perfectly well that all of the decisions that are made are done in your usual... solidaritivistic manor, and I am quite aware that Poland believes and has believed that it owes some allegiance to this fascist fetishist cop simply because of his social status and that they are willing to do so in complete disregard for anything said, truthful or otherwise to the contrary.

But, my reasoning is, and I will repeat here for the...nth time: the entire point of this case from my point of view Zareba was lying in order to cover up his crimes of hitting me with his car. First, you can not have diminished capacity proven if you can not even prove the reality of the event from which you were supposed to be diminished. Next, you can't prove the event without agreement as to what the event was or without admission of any guilt. Now, was I angry that he hit me from behind with and unmarked police car for no reason announced at the time or since? I was livid! What he did to me was not only a crime in the sense that there was action, damage and malice aforethought (proved in court!), but I have not admitted to doing what he has accused me of, nor has it been proved in any way. now, we could argue Zareba’s diminished capacity (road rage is, technically, temporary insanity) but we could only do this if he admits that he did it. and I know that the outrageous stupidity of his lies (I mean, he simply can not be considered a bright star) should have or might have proved that he wasn't, didn't or can't think very clearly, but we can not argue his diminished capacity now because we are without an admission of guilt. on my part, there can not be any diminished capacity to reason because I said that I hit him because of what he did. I admitted this, not that I hit his car, not that that I danced around him like some mad, suicidal propagandist, I told you I hit him because he hit me with his car and that I think, and thought that this was a rather amazingly heinous thing to do. I didn't assault him, I was assaulted and am still being assaulted by him.

I think I have made rather lengthy and reasonable attempts at showing these things. However, and I’m saying this for the nth time as well, that you should be telling me this now, now, however many months after the fact, and on the eve of some possibility of a dismissal smacks of an even further evidence of an unlawful and immoral allegiance that exists.

1.How have you allowed this?

2.Why wasn't I told about it?

3.And why wasn't this a part of the discussion before, and by this I mean during the states part of the argument?

I must admit I am furious at this idea! To ask about a diminished capacity over an event who's lack of actual merits I have been screaming about for nine months is insane! Zareba was lying. His kid came in and lied, and even said (according to you) that she had been coached to lie by the guy who lied about all of this in the first place. What are we even speaking about here? And, where is the rest of my evidences? Or simply, what in the hell are you doing to me now?

I must tell you that my current thinking about the situation is as follows: the idea that seems to be coming from Poland is that they desire some overall sense of control over my life... well, this is nice for Poland I am sure. But, where do they have this right? As far as I can see, I have proved absolutely that the origination of this case was a lie. I also feel, that and this has been made quit clear to me, that this polish desire for polish control seems to supercede any realities of my life, my citizenship or what sorts of things I do to support myself in the world. And of course any fiscal realities that exist here. In Poland, I have been tried as a criminal in direct disregard for the validity of the original claim. For all intents and purposes, I was sentenced (and basically condemned) without trial, and made to pay for my own sentence in a place it is illegal for me to work. And, I have heard complaints that Poland feels I just am not nice enough to them while they rape me. But I really don't understand what you wanted me to do: did you expect me to build you a nice little bike shop you could steal from? Did you want me to entertain you with a little of my work, a little of my life while you sickened me with your lies? Where do you think that I see anything that says that Poland has, other than through its use of violence, corruption and lies, any valid claim to know better what I should do in my own life then I do? I am without a polish passport and without any real evidence that they ever had any real right to touch me. Why should I listen to Poland for any reason other then out fear of it? Who has shown me enough reason other than force and extortion that there is wisdom coming from this place? and this includes you as well. Please, I have learned about Poland, and I do fear you greatly... believe me.

Also, you made a typo here in item three:

Thus, there are 3 possible scenarios involving getting your passport back:
1) The higher ...
2) The lower court...

3) The higher court makes the decision approximately ( ? ) weeks after Feb. 12. (how many weeks?)

Pardon the spelling mistakes... regards,



Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 04:21:38 -0800 (PST)
I didn't receive form you the corrections on the worse case scenario concerning the passport. So I am asking again for the correction...

And I have three things to ask today:

1. Can I have an explanation about this limited capacity issue? I think I made myself in terms of my feelings clear yesterday, but I would like to hear what you have to say.

2. If the courts are so happy to give me back the passport, why don't they just do it? Why the necessity for soap opera? I must say, I am more than a little worried about this situation. And I am this way for two reasons: one, if they are wanting to spring some kind of trap on me, this would be the best way to make sure I was coming back to the courts. Also, they could simply be using this idea as bait for me in terms of money. And by this, I mean, perhaps the thinking is that if I think I am free, some money will miraculously appear...

Really, I wish you could understand how sick all of this makes me now...

And 3, why exactly is it necessary for me to come to this session even if they do give back my passport? I mean, the session is in the afternoon, the plan is to do nothing more then hear evidences anyway, right?

Anyway, because they have decided so late to do what they should have done months ago, I have been put in yet another crappy position. As you know, I am teaching some English here. And though I have other things to do in my life, my current financial situation is a real mess and it is not so easy for me to just walk out on my situation. At the moment, I am on a vacation right now of two weeks. If these guys would have had the slightest care, I could have used this time off to deal with Belarus wisely, instead of being put in yet another compromised position, both there and here. I have now some obligations here, and to do the right thing by everyone does not necessarily make for doing the right thing by myself, either financially or in terms of time. And, Belarussian visas are not free! After these next two weeks I won't have any free time until after the play would have opened. But waking out cold on my situation is simply wrong for everybody (regardless of new prejudices on my part.) and, it does cost money to live anywhere, and to go there with no money in my pocket really would harm me in terms of what I can accomplish while I am there. and this is not just whining, this is reality...

So I guess what I am saying is, I simply don't understand why, if we are in fact done, we can't just... be done without the drama. I simply do not see the point. Especially as you tell me that the feelings of the court are simply to ignore the situation as to anything but good old Adam’s guilt or innocence. I mean, there couldn't have possibly been a connection here between my guilt or innocence and Zareba’s right?

I am going to try and steal some small minutes from you with a face to face if I can before you split for vacation....

Adam

>>> adam goodman 01/29/03 01:35pm >>>
I understand, but at least, how many weeks after the court date would be the worst case scenario?

Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 14:03:37 +0100
Approximately 2


Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:47:42 +0100

Dear Mr. Goodman:

Diminished capacity
I want to emphasize that the term “diminished capacity” refers only to your consciousness at the exact moment of hitting Zareba and not to you in general (incidental/temporary diminished capacity).

First of all you should be aware of the fact that the psychiatric report was prepared as it was you who were examined and it was you who gave me the copy of the psychiatric opinion.

The Court’s summons of the experts who gave the written opinion as a routine and the Court did it ex-officio (neither me or the prosecutor asked for this).

Nobody will examine you during the trial. The experts will only develop their report (especially answer the parties’ questions referring to the report).

You should also know that their affirmation of your incidental/temporary diminished capacity would be very helpful in your situation. There is no doubt that you hit Zareba which basically is against the law. Thus the key issue is why you did it. One of the possible answers could be incidental/temporary diminished capacity having origins in your fear of death mixed with your anger against the attack and the aggressor.

Besides all, during the last hearing, the Court informed everybody present about the summons of the experts, which was translated to you.



Passport
I thought that at least this issue is clear for you, but apparently it is not. Therefore I would like to make you fully aware that none of the courts is interested in giving your passport (are not “so happy to give you back the passport”) which simply means that we to struggle for this.



Your presence
It is your trial. You are the most important person within it. You are obliged to take part in the court hearings and it is your own interest to do so. How could I assure the Court that in the future you would come back from abroad if now you do not even come despite being so close to the court ?



Our line of the defense as to the charge of hitting Zareba (the car-demolishing issue is much easier and obvious)
We will demand you should be declared innocent or the proceedings should be discontinued since no crime, in fact, was committed. Our arguments will be as follows:

It was your necessary self-defense against Zareba’s attack (however, this is rather weak argument because your reaction was quite long time after Zareba’s attack);
You were not aware that punishing Zareba by your own by hitting him for his misconduct was against the law and you found this action just and justified under the circumstances;
You acted under extremely strong emotions, which caused your incidental/temporary diminished capacity; Your deed is of very limited (reduced) social (community) harmfulness.

Our intention is to ask questions to the psychiatrists and to force them to admit that the situation emotionally justified your impulsive reaction.

Could you, please, give your consent for the above line defense? At the moment it is the most important, fundamental issue for us.

I am ready to meet with you tomorrow or on Friday. In the event of our meeting I would like you to present you our opinion and expectations about some fundamental issues introduced by you to our relationships and to discuss the future of our co-operation, if any. Mr. Pieckowski would like to take part in the meeting.

I would like to ask you to limit your e-mails addressed to me (and, potentially, Mr. Pieckowski) to the absolute minimum because there is no positive outcome of the so far correspondence, which, besides all, is highly time-consuming.



And I have one organizational question: did you receive the file which was sent by me (as you asked) to Marcin Drakiewicz ?

Regards,

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 05:01:26 -0800 (PST)

Mr Borus,

I am quite disturbed by your letter today. And I have some base feelings about why I am feeling disturbed by you that I will try and make clear at the end of this note...

1.But first, let’s get right to the point about diminished capacity. Being angry and upset that your life has been threatened intentionally, is not diminished capacity. Diminished capacity means that I was not thinking clearly and that what I did was normally wrong. I wasn’t crazy, wasn’t frothing at the mouth, and wasn’t making a wild, hallucinatory dance at the Solidarnoci intersection. I was attacked while riding my bike by a man in a car. And I reacted in the best manor possible addressing the situation personally and directly. I do not believe that what I did was wrong, or was in any way social misconduct. I did and do believe that what Zareba did, and has done and is doing, is so perversely wrong, that what I did was absolutely justified.

This was my thinking at that moment:

Car... bicycle.... They come together... man in car, not hurt, man on bike, maybe dead...

Are we misunderstanding what is going on? Am I ten feet tall and Zareba is some 40 kilo professor of history? Are we prejudiced against me for my size? That I ride? That I am American? Fat? Jewish? No? He was in a car, which he directed to hit me on purpose, and I was on a bicycle.

Would you have done the same? Let us say you are at home, and you are relaxed, and some guy comes into your house with a weapon of some kind; what are you going to do? Something? Nothing? Pray? Or perhaps some fellow comes from behind you, grabs you and tries to hit you; what are you going to do about it? Really? Would a life affirming reaction be diminished capacity? Is it not some human instinct to protect ones self? This is why I disagree with this argument. There is no regular biker in the world, no one that uses a bike in preference to a car that would not have done the same. And, at the time of the psychiatric test, unless they were lying to me, both the doctor and the interpreter agreed with me in my actions!

2. Secondly, I really think we have to talk about something really important here: What are you trying to say here about this time frame?

It was your necessary self-defense against Zareba’s attack (however, this is rather weak argument because your reaction was quite long time after Zareba’s attack);

I had really thought that this issue was much clearer: what do you mean by such long time? Are we agreeing that I did Zareba’s little crazed car dance? I am not. So where does the five or six seconds it takes to dismount a (pinned to a bus) bike, and punch a guy who just tried to run you over with his ... one or two thousand kilos of steel, sound like a long time? What is your definition of long time? I would really appreciate an explanation about this.

And also, tell me why this argument would be weak in any way... The man hit me with his car, on purpose and without reason. I was being attacked by a man with his car! Can you understand this: being attacked by a man with his car? There was no ‘long time’ this was an ‘In progress event’! And I am here, writing the millionth letter of my captivity because you are telling me that we are allowing some (any!) credibility to exist from the story of a confirmed liar and thief who was and is simply trying to evade his own prosecution!

Perhaps we have not made this point clear because we ourselves are not clear about this.

3. To continue: This is what I have previously heard from you about the issue of my passport:

“Thus, there are 3 possible scenarios involving getting your passport back: 1) the higher court makes the decision before Feb. 12; 2) the lower court decides to give the passport back on Feb. 12; 3) the higher court makes the decision approximately weeks after Feb. 12. 2. I do not know which "thinking" you mentioned. My direct contacts with the court take place only during the hearings and once I had possibility to have an informal chat with the judges. This is the source of my feelings about the court's "thinking". I am in contact with court secretaries, mostly with Ms. Dominika Adamska who deals with your case.”

To my mind, this language seemed to be rather clear. At least clear enough to have begun to make plans over. What that letter said to me was that there was some... return to reason with Polish abusers. But in today’s letter:

“I thought that at least this issue is clear for you, but apparently it is not. Therefore I would like to make you fully aware that none of the courts is interested in giving your passport (are not “so happy to give you back the passport”) which simply means that we to struggle for this.”

Yesterday, I was making plans to return to my life, today, things seem to be quite hostile. So, I find your letter today disturbing. But I have an opinion about this: A few days ago, I wrote a long letter to you expressing my feelings for Poland and my situation and my treatment here. I suppose, if you were not feeling any particular attachment to me or to my case that you might begin, if you didn’t already, to feel somewhat adversarial towards me. I suppose if I was Polish I might sympathize with you, but really, all I really feel is that you do not have my best interests at heart. This feeling has been with me over the last two months since you threatened to quit after I disagreed with a tactic you chose to use without my consent. I feel you are more interested in your connection to the courts then you are to my case or any truth involved. I really feel this, n I have expressed this to the courts when I asked to have you removed as my council.

So, I feel that you are playing emotional games with me. I say this because you seem to be using things that you believe I want as some sort of leverage to get me to do some things that I do not wish to do. Leverage, is power, and power is not always the best way to solve issues. Now, I myself have asked you to help me with some of these power sorts of things to try and get some points across to Zareba, but you have declined to do these things. However, I do feel that you have no problem using these tactics on me? Are you trying to tell me I should be talking to the court with my feelings and not to you? Are you telling me that you can’t or won’t convey my feelings and thoughts when you are in contact and conversation with the courts? Are you telling me that there was something more I could have done to help my situation? Supposedly we are on the same side and are supposed to work together.

My normal preference is for mutual negotiation over force every time because there are good side effects to the relationship after the negotiation, as opposed to the lingering effects of a win/lose conversation.

But what is practical? Certainly I must have an attorney, but as I have had so eloquently pointed out to me; these proceeding have been about gaining my understanding of Poland’s power to harm me. And the greatest point in this case that I can see is that Zareba was a cop. If he was just some idiot like everybody else, I would have been out of here nine months ago, possibly with you holding sufficient bail to pay the damages, or possibly, as the story was so outrageously fake, simply that the situation would be dismissed as civil and not criminal. But Zareba is a cop, right? And I didn’t pay his extortion, right? So, as long as I have been put through this far, can we just try and see something without the mental adjustments: He wasn’t in a police car, he wasn’t in uniform, he was not making an arrest and he lied about everything.

I really wish the courts had allowed us to part. It is my belief, from having read letters like this, and from poor personal interactions before and during the courts, that you basically seem to think it is necessary to try and make me angry. I honestly do not understand the point of this, or what you hope to accomplish by it. But it is having a very bad effect on me as it is increasing dramatically my sense of fear that you are in some sort of arrangement with the prosecution that I do not know about...

I am becoming really quite ill...I may not speak to my woman because of the restrictions placed on me for more that an hour a week...And this only via e-mail because of the prohibitive cost of phoning. There is no way to make a legal living and so I am perpetually impoverished here. I am in a living situation I would never have chosen for myself, and I am forced to listen to lies and coersions of extortionists all day every day... Poland has successfully stolen from me the whole of my life, and all to protect a liar and a thief... Just explain to me what you think I need to do, and I will listen. But, I will not listen complacently and without opinion. Not to you, not to anyone.

Please stop insulting me, sir...



Adam Goodman



Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:49:02 +0100
Dear Mr. Goodman:

Taking into account that our relationship has reached the critical point we decided to terminate it and to notify the Court about this tomorrow.

Regards,

Marcin Boruc

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:37:48 -0800 (PST)
Thank you...


Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:43:45 -0800 (PST) thank you. I wish we could have parted earlier. You have not defended me.

Adam Goodman

>>> adam goodman 02/11/03 12:13pm >>>

Ok, here is the final version of my fifth essay to the courts. I am not sure that I actually really believe what I am saying here about road rage being the reasoning for Zareba hitting me with the car. But all of the people I have met here in Poland like to tell me that polish people do not "do things for the money", and that the reason for his hitting me was simply that he was a mean guy. Possibly. But if what I have hear about the account from the daughter that Zareba was in fact behind me, and from what he said at the station, I believe he was simply scared, at least in the first moment, and that it was a mistake on his part and a bit of road rage. Otherwise, I would just have to say the guy was fishing and I was his prize. Sort of a version of Hemingway's "the old man and he sea" with Zareba as the beleaguered old fisherman finally having his chance at landing the big fish... extortion only? Well, yea, but when I went for him, I know I spoke to the guy in English, and I know that there is no money in Poland so hearing my voice, he knew he was mixing with a westerner... and that means money, only. But I don't like to think that he was following me in order to steal from me... I mean it is possible and this is what I have always thought... because, obviously, everything else he has done has been in order to get money from me... nevertheless, if I was a westerner, you know, I wouldn't come here.... Anyway, you can just read this...

Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:58:48 +0100


Mr. Goodman:

Enclosed please find the psychological opinion concerning the reliability of the witness Katarzyna Zareba. It is in Polish, but basic conclusions given by the expert psychologist are as follows:
1) The testimony does not include any content that could be regarded as confabulation;
2) The witness remembered the details on the basis of her father's reminder.

Contact me at;
beinghad_mail@yahoo.com

HOMEPAGE

- posted by BEING HAD @ 3:52 AM