The injured party—a proxy of a Warsaw-based company on whose behalf he was supposed to sell the granules—filed a criminal complaint against Jacek S. He stated that, in accordance with an oral agreement, on 9 June 2015 he delivered bags of granules to the defendant’s company premises and handed them over to the defendant. The men neither drew up nor signed any agreement, and the injured party also did not receive a receipt confirming acceptance of the goods.
Jacek S. was supposed to pay for the goods the following day, but he then informed the complainant that he was having difficulty making the payment. On 11 June 2015, during a conversation with the injured party, he said that he had had to repay a debt of PLN 1,000,000 and had no money to pay.
Jacek S., however, claimed that the planned transaction had not taken place, despite the granules being brought to his company premises in fabric bags. They were allegedly loaded back into the injured party’s car. This happened because of discrepancies concerning how the resale was to be carried out, as payment for the goods depended on it.
At the initial stage of the investigation, both versions appeared credible. They therefore required verification. To do so, all information carriers found at the defendant’s premises were secured. Thanks to the painstaking analysis of the files stored on them, carried out by a computer expert and, above all, by the prosecutor, evidence was found.
It had previously been established, however, that Jacek S.’s company had experienced problems paying for goods since the beginning of 2015, and that by the end of June he did not have enough money in his bank accounts to pay the injured party for the purchased granules. At that time, Jacek S. met his obligations not from his own funds, but from payments for goods he sold to a customer, agreeing with the seller on a deferred payment date.
In May 2015, Jacek S. called the injured party and offered him the opportunity to purchase 500 kg of silver granules. He repeated the offer several times, claiming that he had a good buyer who would pay for the goods immediately. The injured party agreed and bought the granules in Warsaw on 9 June 2015.
That same day, he transported them to Legnica in his car. The granules, packed in 24 fabric bags, were carried by the injured party and the defendant into Jacek S.’s office at approximately 6:40 p.m. Because there was no internet connection, Kazimierz K. was unable to send the VAT invoice to the defendant’s company email address. He also did not print a goods handover report.
It was agreed that both the VAT invoice and the goods handover report would be sent by email on 10 June 2015. It was also specified that payment for the granules would be made to a bank account on 10 June 2015. During the transaction on the company premises, the injured party took a photograph of the bags of granules with his phone.
Despite repeated requests, Jacek S. delayed payment. Concerned, the injured party came to Legnica on 11 June 2015. Jacek S. initially informed him that he was having difficulty making the payment, then admitted that he had in fact used the PLN 1,000,000 to repay an unspecified obligation.
Because of this conduct, the injured party decided to notify law enforcement of the fraud. During the investigation, telephone call records and surveillance recordings were analysed, and witnesses were questioned. Analysis of the contents of the hard drive in Jacek S.’s laptop revealed that on 10 June 2015—one day after meeting the injured party—he had created, in electronic PDF format using the online invoicing service inFakt.pl, three VAT invoices for the sale by his company of silver granules to two different entities. All of the invoices were printed. The numbering used on the two invoices indicates that they were to be the company’s first transactions in June 2015. Neither of the entities named in these documents as buyers of silver granules had previously been customers of the company, although he had previously sold granules to only one entity.
It is also significant that, immediately before preparing the invoices, the defendant searched the internet for the necessary details of the companies entered on them. It is also important that the defendant did not try to purchase the granules from his existing suppliers, but instead offered the injured party such a delivery. He did so more than four months after the last transaction, despite previously announcing that he would no longer conduct such business activity.
The prosecutor believes that an analysis of all the material proves that Jacek S. must have had 500 kg of silver granules at his disposal. Creating and printing the invoices in the absence of such silver granules would have been completely illogical conduct on his part. Jacek S. was therefore charged with defrauding the injured party by obtaining silver granules worth PLN 1,062,295 from him.
The defendant, Jacek S., pleaded not guilty to the alleged offence and exercised his right to refuse to give explanations or answer questions. He faces up to 10 years in prison for the fraud.
The defendant had no previous convictions. He has now ceased his business activity and supports himself with odd jobs, which are currently his only source of income. He is not registered as unemployed.
Liliana Łukasiewicz, press spokesperson for the Legnica District Prosecutor’s Office/ii