The owner of an apartment on Daszyńskiego Street in Bolesławiec described her encounter with the Bolesławiec police—a story that is difficult to believe.
– On Thursday, September 5, a friend called me to say that my apartment had been vandalized, the owner of the property recounts. – I came to Daszyńskiego at 4:00 p.m., but the tenant to whom I had rented the property since January this year was not there. He did not answer my calls, and I did not have the keys to enter the apartment and assess the damage. I only sent him a text message saying that I wanted to see the apartment the next day, Friday. Before that happened, on Thursday at 10:00 p.m., I received another message from my friend. She wrote that there had been a disturbance in the apartment, that the police had intervened, and that the premises had been left wide open. I went there; indeed, the apartment had been vandalized and the door was open. The next day, Friday, September 6, we boarded up the door with a panel so that no one could enter again. I also met with the tenant and terminated his lease that day. He explained that he was the victim because he had been attacked in the apartment and had not caused the damage, but I no longer wanted to listen to his explanations, the owner adds.
Apparently, drug-fueled parties had taken place in the rented apartment several times. On September 5, a social gathering must have gotten out of control. One of the guests caused the greatest damage. Neighbors said that an axe or another sharp tool had been used. That is why they called the police. Photographs of the apartment taken by the owner show broken panes in the room door, blood on the floor, and extensive damage throughout the apartment. The woman reported the matter to the police.
– At first glance, I estimated the losses at approximately 20,000 zlotys, but an expert will assess them precisely, the owner says. – The police documented everything and informed me that if the tenant returned and broke into the apartment, I should call the police, the woman adds.
After terminating the lease, the woman contacted her former tenant again only so that he could collect his belongings in her presence. In numerous text messages, she arranged additional times and dates when they could meet, but he did not agree to any of them.
To everyone’s surprise, instead of meeting the owner and legally collecting his belongings, the man broke into the apartment twice. First with a friend on September 8—the incident is shown in a video recording—and the following day, September 9, with his partner. He used a half-open window to get inside. The neighbors notified the police the second time. Officers caught the young man and his partner in the act. The owner was called to the scene, and it was during this intervention that most of the surprises occurred.
– When I arrived at the scene, I saw two young police officers who had detained my former tenant and his acquaintance, the owner recounts. – It seemed to me that the officers did not know what to do. The former tenant explained that he wanted to take some document because he needed to obtain a loan. The officer knew that the man they had caught rented or was still renting the apartment. I showed the officers the terminated agreement dated September 6 and explained that they were dealing with a former tenant who had no right to enter the apartment. I showed them the text messages we had exchanged, in which I offered to meet him so he could collect his belongings in my presence. I also explained that the detained man had damaged the apartment, that I had estimated the losses at 20,000 zlotys, and that the matter had already been reported to the police. Then the officer began calling someone and asking what he should do, the woman recounts.
After the phone call, the officer ordered the detainees to be searched. During the search, it turned out that the detained woman had a portable boiler thermostat from the premises in her possession—property that did not belong to her. The detainee explained that she had mistaken the thermostat for a watch and thought it belonged to her boyfriend.
– I took the thermostat and put it in my bag, the owner says. – I kept insisting that the man should be detained for burglary and theft. Then the officer called again, and two more officers arrived in an unmarked vehicle.
Police: it was not burglary
The police officers who arrived at the scene asked the woman how much the thermostat found on the detainee might be worth.
– I replied that my husband had valued it at 1,000 zlotys, the apartment owner recounts. – At this, the officer smiled and, without seeing the item, suggested that its value might be lower. The second officer, in turn, added that he had seen the man entering the house through the window. He concluded that the man had done it so carefully that he had not damaged the window. He added that this was not burglary. I asked him how he knew the window was undamaged. The officers did not want to enter the apartment and did not ask me to assess any possible damage, the tenant explains.
The officers eventually asked the detainee herself which thermostat her partner had taken and, based on her words, estimated that the device could have cost no more than 500 zlotys. They did all this in front of the apartment owner, who was the injured party.
The owner wondered on what basis the officer had determined the value of the item taken from the premises and whether he had any right to do so at all.
In the end, the police released the detainees with fines and prepared a report. When the owner went to the police station to provide additional information about the case, the officer who came out to speak with her still maintained, according to her account, that entering an apartment through a half-open window could not be called burglary.
We asked the spokesperson for the District Police Headquarters in Bolesławiec about the case. Here is an answer that adds nothing to the matter.
In response to your question, I kindly inform you that police officers always take the actions provided for by law when they receive a report of a situation that violates the law. The same was true during the intervention in question. I would add that, on every occasion, participants in an intervention are informed by the police officers present at the scene about the rights to which they are entitled and may exercise.
junior asp. Bartłomiej Sobczyszyn, Deputy Press Officer of the District Police Commander in Bolesławiec