Another hearing involving councillor Dariusz F. covered several issues. The strongest testimony was given by Ewa’s husband, the victimised cemetery employee. In his testimony, the man prompted the councillor to issue a statement in which Dariusz F. expressed concern for his safety.
– When I hear these arguments, I deeply regret that a few years ago we were a normal family, because now I don’t know: will I get punched in the face when I leave, or will he say good morning to me? I may feel threatened. I deeply regret helping someone from my family, Ewa here. I won’t pretend otherwise: I am very disappointed by what I heard from my cousin. And I am sorry that a man who was a witness at my wedding is telling such stories. I understand that he is her husband. I will defend my rights and prove, if the court allows me, that he threatened me and wants to destroy me, because there are witnesses to this – Dariusz F stated in court.
Testimony from the victim’s husband
In his testimony, the victim’s husband spoke about his wife’s deteriorating health and the darkest period of her professional life: stress, fear and humiliation.
– There is so much of it that I don’t know where to begin. My wife started working in the cemetery flower shop, and it seemed that everything was more or less fine there – the husband said. – There were worse days, but generally it wasn’t bad. One day, the accused offered my wife a job in the office because someone had retired. My wife was happy about it, but what was supposed to be another happy stage quickly turned into a tragedy. My wife is naturally reserved and quiet, does not like arguing, does not lose her temper, and the accused probably saw this as her weakness. He considered her the weakest person in the entire workplace and took out his frustrations on her with increasing insolence and ruthlessness. Since he was naturally cowardly and did not stand up to people with strong personalities, he chose my wife as his victim. He wanted to turn her into an employee for everything: fetch this, carry that, sweep up. He kept telling her: you are only here to help; you are not entitled to a stamp; you are not allowed to sign invoices. In short, he wanted to have a servant at the cemetery. As for days off and holidays, it was already a path through torment – the victim’s husband added, describing the situation from his perspective.
As an example, the witness cited two situations: obtaining permission to go on a pilgrimage and taking their child to the doctor for a follow-up appointment. In both cases, he claimed, his wife did not obtain permission easily, and merely thinking about asking for a day off caused her considerable stress.
– After the situation involving taking our child to the doctor (editor’s note), I couldn’t take it any longer and called him (the accused – editor’s note), although my wife insisted that I should not do so. I said a few things to him; I will not repeat them because they were vulgar. I asked what I should do to make him leave my wife alone, and he started with his usual: but you know that she makes mistakes... Everyone makes mistakes, especially when one cannot concentrate at work because of the accused – the witness added.
The witness also spoke about his wife’s health, which deteriorated while she was employed in an office position at the cemetery.
– My wife developed shoulder inflammation. The doctor said it was not caused by an injury, but was the result of prolonged stress – the witness said. – To this day, my wife is under a psychologist’s care and takes antidepressants. She is no longer the same person she was: cheerful, happy and smiling before she started working at the cemetery – the victim’s husband added.
The testimony concerning the victim’s mental state was also confirmed by two other female witnesses: the victim’s sister and her friend from a prayer group.
Text messages and signatures on slips of paper
During the questioning of witnesses, the first woman testified about text messages that the victim had allegedly sent to people connected with the parish she belonged to. The witness knew the content of the alleged messages by hearsay. She had not seen or received them, and the person who told her about them had immediately deleted them because of their unpleasant content. The witness also spoke about meeting the victim several months earlier.
– Mrs Ewa confided in me about her relationship with the accused. When I was returning from the parish house, she stopped me and said that she had taken the matter to court and would destroy him (Dariusz F. – editor’s note). I replied: Mrs Ewa, you cannot do that, because you will destroy a beautiful family, namely the accused’s family. And she replied: he is destroying me too – the witness added.
The second woman, who had replaced the victim at work, in turn testified that she had accidentally discovered slips of paper bearing the accused councillor’s signature under a calendar on the desk where the victim had previously worked.
– This is what happened: I was sitting at Mrs Ewa’s desk. There was a large calendar-notebook on it, and I had never looked underneath it. I accidentally caught it, and everything fell onto the floor – the witness testified. – I was alone in the office, while the manager was in his own office. Concerned by the noise, he asked what had happened. I replied that I had dropped some things. Seeing some slips of paper, I wanted to throw them away, but I asked whether I could do so and asked the manager to look at them. Among them was a small slip with some stamp and signatures. The signatures looked as though Mr Dariusz F. had signed them. The manager was very surprised and said they were not his signatures. The manager prepared a note and asked me to sign it – the woman added. This testimony suggests that the victim had been practising the manager’s signature, but whether this story is true will be assessed by the court.
The woman also testified that she had had no problems with the accused at work and that her work had been well assessed. She added that she had not noticed any behaviour by the manager that could constitute workplace bullying, but she had not discussed the manager with the other employees. While checking the records of buried persons for 2018–19, the woman found errors made by the victim and also by manager Dariusz F.
The accused’s defence lawyer asked the court to contact Urząd Miasta Bolesławiec for information on where the documents concerning specific entries and errors in the records, allegedly made by the victim during the period covered by the indictment, were located.
– At present, we know that the documents were submitted and were supposed to be at the company’s headquarters, but they are not there, as MZGM director Kazimierz Łomotowski testified – the defence lawyer explained.
According to the defence lawyer, these documents will make it possible to assess how many errors the victim made in the records.