There is simply a good regulation in Polish tradition to speak, as far as possible, of the dead well or not at all ("quieter over this coffin"). Caused by this rule – let God justice the dead, not us who remained – in the context of the death of Waldemar Chrostowski, the driver of priest Jerzy Popiełuszko, I intended to stay silent. Neither the scale of lies, vileness, nor the nonsense of media liars with GW in the head, nor the glorification of the unfortunate driver, have over the past 2 weeks changed my mind. And yet everyone has any kind of immunity limit. I met mine erstwhile I learned that tomorrow, farewell, Waldemar Chrostowski's Holy Mass is to be celebrated in the Church of St. Stanislaus Kostka – a parish and the earthly resting place of Blessed Fr Jerzy Popiełuszko, whom Waldemar Chrostowski – are, unfortunately, facts – betrayed. Being aware that the fact about the execution of Jerzy Popiełuszko, the loudest and most mysterious crime of the Polish People's Republic, is absolutely crucial for knowing in the fact the latest past of Poland and knowing besides what is happening today, I know that I cannot – I have no right to stay silent. On the contrary, I consider it my work to present the facts – even briefly – due to the fact that these belong to the Martyr of our time, Priest George, to all those who remember Him, but besides to the people surviving here and now, in the present reality, for the knowing of which these facts are much more crucial than many might seem.
This is simply a brief evidence of just a tiny fragment of a forgotten investigation, which is not so much history, but something that is inactive going on.
On 31 August 1987, the patron Edward Wende, acting on behalf of Waldemar Chrostowski, concluded a deal with the kiszczakowski Ministry of the Interior with the highest classification. Its subject was the events of October 13 and 19, 1984, connected with the abduction of Father George. “The injured individual admits that the sole work for the harm caused to him is borne by persons convicted by the judgement of the Provincial Court in Toruń on 7 February 1985. The Treasury – the Ministry of the Interior, bearing in head that the actions of the defendants have harmed not only the wellness of the injured person, but besides the interests of the Polish People's Republic – and especially interior security, and that they will not be able to meet the legitimate demands of W. Chrostowski in the face of long word prison sentences. The Treasury – the Ministry of the Interior, assessing the nature of the injured person's injuries, the degree of the harm caused to the person's individual usage and the degree of the harm caused to him, reducing his income and prospects for the future, undertakes to pay, and the typical of Waldemar Chrostowski assumes the full amount of PLN 1 650 000 as compensation, but that the satisfaction of the claim includes: compensation for PLN 600,000, compensation for material losses caused by the accident, in the form of damaged items, lost income and feeding costs of PLN 250,000, one-time compensation in place of the equalisation pension of PLN 800,000, a full of PLN 1,650,000. Attorney-General Edward Wende, on behalf of the injured Waldemar Chrostowski, declares that the amount paid to him represents a full compensation for the harm caused and waives further claims for the present and future consequences of the events of 13 and 19 October 1984 in relation to both the State Treasury and the perpetrators of the crime.’
It is an extraordinary commitment, as is the settlement itself. There was something incomprehensible in the decision of the Ministry of the Interior, breaking all the canons of the procedure then in force, which consented to the payment of gigantic compensation for those times (the five-year average wage of the statistical Pole) in addition to the typical of the hostile opposition. However, it was even more incomprehensible that the settlement was accepted by Waldemar Chrostowski, the hero and only witness to the crime at the priest George – a settlement whose content was to close the enquiry erstwhile and for all, which truly happened on the tragic evening of October 19, 1984. For many years – until the publication of my book “Who truly Killed Him?” in 2005 – Waldemar Chrostowski's commitment to seal the authoritative version of the events remained covered by the clause of the deepest mystery. How do I explain this deal? Why did Counselor Edward Wende never uncover its content?
Why is it covered by the secret clause in the Ministry of the Interior?
It would be simple to admit that the curious parties were guided by “humanitarian motives”. But was specified generosity possible in the PRL? It will not be believed by anyone who has learned the methods of the MMA in People's Poland.
The classified papers that IPN prosecutors have reached clearly indicate that the fact is much more complicated. The decision of the Ministry of the Interior is an component of a logical, consistent and cunning game. A game where the “only” disclosure of the fact about the most mysterious crime of PRŁ was not at stake. A game that started long before the execution of chaplain “Solidarity” and which has not yet been completed. Collected by prosecutor Andrzej Witkowski and his investigative squad of evidence of close colleagues and household of Father George indicate that his driver – like Dr. Jekyll and Mister Hyde – had 2 faces. As Dr. Jekyll, he was a “man of a priest”, accompanied by a bodyguard, driver and confidant everywhere. As a mystery Hyde – as it appears from the papers and accounts of witnesses – he conducted a perfidious game and only pretended to be a friend of Father George, whom he was not in reality. And if he wasn't who he thought he was, who was he really?
To answer that question, you gotta go back to the bad night of October 19-20, 1984, during which Waldemar Chrostowski was to make a bravado jump from a moving car to a concrete roadway. Irrespective of the experts' opinions, which qualify for specified a leap in terms of mission impossible – 2 local visions involving stuntmen who tried to repeat the “hero” jump of Chrostowski, but at a velocity of twice the velocity (!), in both cases ended with a long-term hospitalization, while the alleged “hero” shrank dust and, as if nothing at all, ran through himself – prosecutor Andrzej Witkowski and his co-workers gained hard evidence that presenting the circumstances of their necky escape during the abduction of the priest, Chrostowski wasn't telling the truth! 1 specified evidence is the opinion of Andrzej Italianowicz, prof. of method and Humanities Academy, expert in textile goods. According to Chrostowski's account, the harm to his jacket, in which he was dressed for a tragic evening, was caused by the capture of her behind by 1 of the SB officers, and then by the impact on asphalt. The IPN prosecutors decided to verify this relation by subjecting the coat to specialized inspections. prof. Italianowicz explicitly excluded Chrostowski's version. ‘As a consequence of the external force, the lateral suture was torn. Then the mediate suture was fractured and the back of the coat was cut off utilizing the sharp tool. By force of things it could not have happened simultaneously, both of these events occurred at different times. The cut-off of this posterior field of the coat occurred as a consequence of the usage of the object, sharp tool, which could have been a knife, razor, razor, and akin objects. There was no surface friction at the back of the jacket. The left hand and sleeves of the navy show harm due to violent jerks and sharp cuts. It is impossible for these cuts to arise from strong abrasion on the ground, including asphalt. Most likely, this was done in specified a way that first the sharp arm of the left sleeve and the sleeve of the right coat was cut, and then the left and right sleeves of the coat were abrasions due to strong abrasion on the ground, which could besides be asphalt. Also, harm to the left sleeve and sleeve of the right jacket, caused by violent jerks, occurred before the coat sleeves were touched with the ground. The harm to the sleeve of the left and right coat due to violent jerks and sharp cuts could besides not arise – which is apparent in the light of what I have already testified – as a consequence of contact with rough ground, including asphalt" - the court expert stated.
The question was: "Could the harm to the back of the coat and the sleeves of the right and left in the form of harm caused by violent jerks and sharp cuts have occurred at the time of the jumping of Waldemar Chrostowski from the car in Przysiek, including as a consequence of being caught behind the back of the coat by 1 of the people inside the car?" – prof. Italianist replied unequivocally: "The harm to the coat described in this question could not arise from the jumping of Waldemar Chrostowski from the car on 19 October 1984 in Przysiek. These harm with a very advanced probability occurred at a different time and circumstances.’
So there are 2 possibilities: either Waldemar Chrostowski, telling about the dramatic course of his escape from the torturers' car in October 1984, from the beginning to the end he lied, or prof. Andrzej Italianowicz, who gave evidence at the IPN last May, issued an opinion which from the beginning to the end is incompatible with the facts. However, if you accept the second version, how can you explain the fact that another expert judge, Teresa Szkuta, issued an identical opinion for the IPN?
"I agree with everything he testified about in the minutes of the expert proceeding of 11 May 2004, prof. Andrzej Italianowicz. Throughout my time, I am joining his statements, conclusions and opinions contained in this minutes of the expert hearing. I have nothing more to add in this regard," she said.
How is Chrostowski's version with respect to this shocking information? Nothing.
—————————————————————————————————————————
Questions can be multiplied forever.
Why did Chrostowski's cuffs open erstwhile he jumped out of his car have spiky teeth? Why did the perpetrators calmly drive away, although they were aware that Chrostowski survived (Peterowski saw him emergence from his knees), and this crossed the anticipation of hiding the circumstances of the crime? Is it a coincidence that in the summertime of 1984, erstwhile hosting Józef Popiełuszko, Waldemar Chrostowski told “how to jump out of a speeding car”: “You gotta curl up in a bundle and not resist, be relaxed, then nothing will happen”? A fewer months before the tragic kidnapping, did the driver talk about his “specialization” or, as the brother of the murdered priest suspects, “looks like it was planned”?
The answers to these questions are in classified papers to which prosecutors of the Institute of National Memory have reached. On 2 August 1984, Waldemar Chrostowski was registered the year by Section I of Division IV of the Capital Office of the Interior (SUSW) in Warsaw under No. 39785 as operational safety for the operational case of the codename "Popiel". The basis for registration by the SB unit was information indicating that Chrostowski had "contacts with utmost activists >Solidarity<". The main intent of the registration was to draw up a plan to work out Waldemar Chrostowski, which was a preliminary step for the active usage of him in the case called Popiel. The registration was made by Lieutenant Vladimir Fijał of the 4th SUSW, and as of November 1984 the material concerning the individual Chrostowski was the work of Colonel Edward Janczura, the head of the Home Office of the Independent Operations Group. (The importance of a secret associate was measured by the rank of leading officer – in this case very high). It is not known how the "workout" went, due to the fact that in December 1989, the folder with materials on Waldemar Chrostowski divided the destiny of thousands of another folders and was destroyed. However, on the 3rd registration card concerning the driver of priest Popiełuszko, the information was preserved, in which he besides mentioned his operational nickname: “Desperate”. This, according to the IPN note, is very crucial information. It points out that the position of the registered individual has changed by the fact that it has been given an operational pseudonym, which “in practice, the MMA only refers to the candidate as a secret associate or secret associate”! Expert opinions in comparison with doubts of those active in examining the injuries of the priest's driver Popiełuszek on October 19, 1984, proves that only 2 facts presented by Waldemar Chrostowski about the abduction of Father George are actual – date and place of kidnapping: October 19, 1984, in Górsk. Everything else is made for public use, supported by powerful, invisible force, hoax!
CDN
Subliminski.pl
![Nie współpracowała podczas kontroli i gwałtownie pożałowała. Policjantki wybiły szybę samochodu i wyciągnęły ją siłą [WIDEO]](http://www.radiowroclaw.pl/img/articles/152377/Ge7xpiv1Wc.jpg)