On his Facebook profile, attorney Wojciech Kasprzyk, Dominik’s defense lawyer, wrote on November 13:
Today, Dominik’s verdict became final. The prosecutor’s office did not appeal. We sincerely thank all those who supported him, offered words of encouragement, believed in the wisdom of the court, collected signatures (for a pardon), and provided financial support!!! Good deeds come back!!!
After the verdict was announced, prosecutor Sebastian Woźniak informed the Bolec.info portal, which was unfavorable toward Dominik, that the prosecutor’s office would most likely challenge the verdict because, as he argued in his closing statement during the trial, the prosecution disagreed with the position of the experts from Warsaw who assessed the defendant’s condition. Woźniak questioned this opinion in his closing statement at the court proceedings stage and claimed that he had demonstrated omissions, inconsistencies and contradictions with the findings from the evidence.
Despite the declarations made in the media, the prosecutor’s office did not appeal, and the verdict is final.
From the first days after the tragedy that occurred on Spokojna Street in Bolesławiec in October 2017, we reported this difficult case to you and supported Dominik’s defense lawyers and Dominik himself. We believe this is a very important verdict for victims who have been abused for years by domestic perpetrators. Lawyers representing such victims will certainly rely on it in the future. The defendant’s in-depth psychological analysis is also important, as it shows the devastation experienced by a child and their personality when raised by alcoholic parents.
We remind you: in the reasoning supporting the verdict, Judge Daniel Strzelecki spoke about the defendant’s difficult situation, as since childhood he had faced a situation of continuous danger from his mother and her partners that was too difficult for someone his age.
“The defendant’s life was a struggle for survival,” the judge said. “He lived under constant threat. From his earliest years, he cared for his younger brother, although as a teenager he was not prepared for this responsibility. He took him to kindergarten, picked him up, prepared food for him when his mother left home on drinking binges, provided him with a basic sense of security, stayed with him and looked after him. All these circumstances led the experts to the correct conclusion that the deeper the disorder and the greater the frustration in such a young person during the period when their personality was forming, and the greater the wounds, the greater the uncontrolled outburst of aggression with which we were dealing. As a result of years of frustration, fear and danger, and as a result of his mother’s and her partner’s attack at the critical moment, the defendant’s emotions ceased to be subject to his intellectual control. This act escaped his control, and the defendant found himself—in his assessment—in a situation with no way out. All these circumstances led to the court finding that the defendant lacked criminal responsibility, even to a limited degree. The court also recognized the need for a preventive measure in the form of therapy to institutionally provide the defendant with psychological support,” Daniel Strzelecki explained in his reasoning for the verdict.