Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)
Annex
The Case of Hedviga Malinová team’s impartiality and pointed out absurdity of the situation in which his client was supposed to prove her innocence in the case against her while she did not even know the charges against her. TIhe case ííIe yiElds íts secrets On September 27, 2007, Roman Kvasnica was finally allowed to inspect the case file at the Office of Attorney General and was promised that he would also be allowed to inspect the videotapes made during his client’s interrogation on September 9, 2006. Three days later, an investigator with the Bureau for Combating Corruption notified the Office of Attorney General that he had rejected the motion for criminal prosecution of the prime minister and interior minister filed by Jozef Šátek. On October 3, 2007, Kvasnica received a copy of the false evidence case file.23 The 640-page file lacked a letter from Peter Korček who had filed a motion for criminal prosecution of Hedviga Malinová on grounds of giving false evidence; also, the file contained no trace of questioning the former intelligence service agent who had allegedly formulated the motion. Not only did the case file reveal that there was no saliva sample on the sealing strip of the envelope in which Malinová had received her identity papers but also that the saliva sample had never been analyzed. The police only analyzed DNA traces on the envelope that may well have come from physical contact (i.e. touch of the hand) and compared them to the victim’s DNA sample. As far as the anti-Hungarian inscription on the victim’s blouse (which along with the address on the envelope matched the victim’s handwriting according to the interior minister) goes, the case file revealed that an expert with the Institute of Criminal Expertise of the Slovak Police Force had testified in September 2006 that the sample was not fit for examination because the text was too short and was written in capital letters in compliance with the schooling standard. According to testimonies given by the doctor who first treated Malinová at the Nitra hospital’s traumatological department as well as the staff of the ambulance that transported her from the university to the hospital, the victim had a swollen face, a ripped lip, a rapid pulse, high blood pressure and multiple bmises on her legs. Since the victim was in shock, the ambulance doctor administered to her a large dose of sedative (10 mg of Diazepam); although both doctors on duty advised the investigators of the victim’s state, they ignored their opinion and questioned her at the Nitra hospital at noon as well as at the Dunajská Streda hospital in the evening. 311
