Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)

Annex

Annex - Marie Vrabcová

Despite that, the Office of Attorney General interpreted polygraph test results as the proof of tested persons’ truthfulness. For instance, Attorney General Dobroslav Tmka said it was beyond any doubt that the two suspects had not attacked Malinová.

According to experts in the field of criminology, the chosen methodology of asking questions as well as changing that methodology in the course of the test cannot be considered standard. If two or more persons are investigated over the same matter or if it is necessary to repeat the test, the referential methodology must remain the same throughout testing and the questions must be formulated absolutely unambiguously. In this particular case, it remains unclear on what basis the experts elaborated the questions for the polygraph test as they never received the case file from the Office of Attorney General. Last but not least, the very question regarding the attack on Malinová is doubtful because the assailants did not know the name of the victim at the time of the attack, which means they could testify in all honesty that they did not attack Malinová. According to Roman Kvasnica, it cannot be ruled out that someone prepared the suspects for the test in advance in order to manipulate the public since polygraph test results are not acknowledged as evidence before courts of justice in Slovakia anyway.

FORENSiC doCTORS ACCUSEd of biAS

On August 10, 2009, Dean of Comenius University’s Medical Faculty Peter Labaš addressed a letter to Hedviga Malinová in which he asked for a permission to publish her medical records. Malinová refused and filed a complaint objecting to prejudice of Labaš and other doctors who had participated in elaborating the expert’s opinion.47 Her legal counsel Roman Kvasnica filed another complaint with the Office of Attorney General in which he pointed out that Labaš was a politically active and partial person because he had taken part in election campaign of incumbent President Ivan Gašparovič who repeatedly criticized Malinová in the media. Labaš may have even violated the law by publicly evaluating available evidence in the media before investigation was officially terminated and even portrayed himself as someone whose opinion was decisive for investigators’ conclusions.

According to Kvasnica, Labaš also violated the law by failing to summon doctors from Nitra to give official testimony; instead, Labaš questioned them privately thus compelling them to divulge medical secrets. Kvasnica argued that Labaš had no right to ask Malinová to authorize him to publish her medical records, reasoning that according to the law, a forensic expert is not entitled to provide information on facts from medical

328