Polish citizens given away to foreign law courts - is this normal?

Today Jakub Tomczak was found guilty of rape and brutal attack by British law court. I don't claim whether he was guilty or not, because I do not have enough information, so I leave it to the court, and court found him guilty. But I don't like, that Polish citizen is given away to a foreign court just because he is SUSPECTED (so BEFORE he was prooved to be guilty). Imagine, that some of you is simply similar to some criminal person. Even when found not guilty his/her life is touched deeply. And what if trial takes place in country where people are prejudiced against Poles (like in Germany for instance)? There is quite a high possibility, that trial can be not complitely fair.

I think, that citizens of EU countries should be taken to law courts in their homelands.

Why, so they can gain unfair advantage. I think a person charged with a crime should be tried in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed.

Sorry but I have to disagree.

As do I.

Moreover I wonder, why did UK refuse giving to Poland stalinist murderer Wolinska? Looks like law is working one way, other way not. I think it all says, that Poland as a state does not exist since it gives away its citizens on anybodys demand (BTW AFAIR giving away a citizen is against Polish constitution).

How would this work? This Poles is being tried in the United Kingdom for an offense committed here. He can not be tried in Poland for a British offense. Even more to the point, a Pole may be arrested for an offense in England which is quite legal in Poland. How then could a Polish court hold a trial?

Why?


Normally. People were being judged in their countries for crimes commited abroad before EU appeared in the world.

No, not if the offense took place here. They would have to apply for a warrant of extradition.

Eh? Isn't this how courts are meant to work???? They decide whether someone is guilty or not based on the evidence presented... Why shouldn't Polish citizens (or anyone else for that matter) be subject to British law if they commit offences in the UK??

Personally I wouldn't want to be captured and taken away thousands of km just because someone thinks I comitted a crime. Jakub's process had taken a year before he was sentenced. During this time suspected person is placed in foreign country and thus has, in practice, less power to defend himself. In my opinion such person is also more likely to have not reliable process due to nationality-based biases. I think we can observe very emotional attitude in Jakub's process as well. Like I said, I cannot tell if he is guilty or not, but I can tell that process was full of doubts (unreliable DNA test, poor CCTV picture, local media which had sentenced him before law coutr did, infuencing juries and local community). Looks like some stinking buisiness :/

neither would I... but after all, it was a Polish court that agreed to the extradition, not some mob of British bounty hunters who turned up and just bundled him into a van. The process of law has been followed and your own judges must have been convinced that the evidence to support the case. Also, Britain doesn't have the same level of corruption as Poland (according to annual Transparency International studies) and personally I have more confidence in the British judiciary (which isn't under political control) than the Polish one (which is).

^ The DNA test is 99.999999% accurate.

I don't know why Poles are b*tching about this rapist, in Poland you lock up innocent people for many years without trial, sometimes on sweet f*ck all evidence. Look at what happened to that poor bastard Bruce Robinson, more than a year in prison because corrupt local officials need a scapegoat to put the blame onto.

Funny, here two test had been done, first told he was not guilty, second told he was guilty. Well, DNA tests, as any others, are valuable proof when processed professionally. Personally I doubt in profesionalism of those who did these tests. Their test have only 50% confidence.

It's not because defending the criminal. It's about a simple reflection: was this trial really OK? Was the fact that he is Polish really not important? Two tests mutually exclusive. Isn't it just suspected? Isn't it just strange that on CCTV we can see person once wearing striped shirt, and once chcecked? You can't see face on CCTV, only some person(s) walking. Hm...

This was a crime committed within the express jurisdiction of English law. How can Polish law apply? It wasn't like a Swede murdered a Chinaman on Mexican territory, that'd muddy the water somewhat. Why do u think the international community didn't let a German court try Adolf Eichmann? There is such a thing as declinature but putting a political spin on it was unfair. They are duty bound to be fair and just. Britain has produced a catalogue of miscarriages of justice but they were largely within the context of terrorism where evidence was harder to come by.

just heard a thought provoking question -

is it better to let the guilty go free or imprison the innocent?

personal gut feeling is to let the guilty go free as imprisoning the innocent is something i deplore - but how to apply this in jakubs case, hmmm...?

Quite simply actually. The DNA evidence proved his guilt. So there is no question of his guilt here. Not at all..

are you saying he's innocent?

Not at all. Both tests of the sample were positive. The first test was incorrectly assessed by the computer software and so needed to be analysed again.

^^^^^double standards???? vvvvvvvv


He was "given away to a foreign court" because the DNA evidence that HE DID NOT CONTEST said it was one-in-a-billion odds that it was him!

It seems to be that you, like his family, are choosing to ignore this extremely compeling fact!

As to the UK "refusing to give Poland stalanist murderer Wolinska". Maybe the British didn't want to get involved in "the Kaczyńscy 'duck' brothers" communist witch hunt!

In Polish law a person can be prosecuted in Polish courts if one of these apply:

- a person is Polish and commits crime anywhere in the World
- a person comitted a crime against a Polish person of Poland's
- a person comitted a crime within Poland's border's

This is not unique to Poland at all. Most countries use that approach.

For a Polish person to be punished by Polish law, that person must break a foreign law that is also punishable in Poland. There used to be also a clause about a Polish person breaking foreign local laws not punishable by Polish law, but it was controversial and hard to implement. I'm not sure how this part looks now.

what a crock of ****, tell that to those British langishing in foreign prisons

As for the rapist, wonder how he's gonna get on in a prison over here, they hate sex offenders, I'll give him about 2 weeks before he commits suicide!

Prisons in Poland are no different. Rapists are treated as the lowest of the low.

Pretty typical worldwide. Foreigners will get the death penalty in the U.S., just like any American citizen.

Poore ignorant statement. Wolinska was requested to be given to Polish court years before Kaczynski's bros won elections. And what you call 'witch hunt' is an attempt to finally punish those who were killing Polish patriots after WW2 because they did not agree with comunism. You have very poor knowledge about Poland.

Yeah z_darius, u gave some theoretical grounding but invariably such provisions aren't invoked. We are talking about the logical order of things and the English court chose to exercise jurisdiction. There was no question of giving away anything to a foreign court.

This kind of stuff happens all the time. A few months ago a canadian was arrested in Thailand for raping/molesting boys - his trial will take place in a Thai court, not a canadian one and he will most likely serve a prison sentence (if found guilty) in a Thai prison(unless canada asks to have him serve his time here). You go to trial/prison in the country you commit the crime in.

I commented on the question of grounds for the possible prosecution by Polish legal system. The provisions described sometimes are chosen not to be applied. In most cases, if the harm has been done in a foreign country and if that country requests extradition, or simply decides to prosecute a Pole (since he/she is already there) then Polish law provides for some elasticity based on individual circumstance. In this case I see no reason why Poles would prefer to prosecute the man in Poland, instead of allowing British courts to do so.


As a side note, I have a feeling he would get a much stiffer sentence under Polish law.

I agree with this. I can tell u that he'd be looking at 15 years minimum, I discussed this with my students today and there was consensus on this point. He may well have been assoilzed/exonerated by the Polish court according to some legal experts here

Cant wait till he drops the soap.....he's never going to forget his stay in england the lowlife scumbag. Lets hope he learns that you dont rap[e then beat half to death women,and all you Poles upset about it,hope your just as supportive when this scumbag gets deported back to Poland and its your daughters ,mums or grandma's that he's surrounded by.

Just like Freddy Mercury (RIP) felt when Brian May talked about leaving the band. Freddy took it hard and thought Brian would be behind him all the way, hehehe. Would sir care for Dove?