STS Adjourns Trial in Purgatory Case until June

Banska Bystrica, 11 May (TASR) - The high-profile trial in the Purgatory case involving former top police and security forces officials suspected of setting up and operating a criminal group between 2012 and 2018 was adjourned by the Specialised Criminal Court (STS) in Banska Bystrica on Monday and is set to resume on 1 June, TASR reported on the same day. The prosecutor didn't even start reading the extensive indictment. The trial was adjourned due to a procedural motion from former special prosecutor Dusan K.'s defence team requesting that the indictment should be joined with a different case involving former police officer Roman S. [names abbreviated due to legal reasons]. The two cases overlap, and if the court didn't merge them, the taking of evidence would have to be carried out twice. The prosecutor stated that he doesn't view this move as an obstruction, as it will in no way disrupt the proceedings, and he described it as expedient. All of the ten defendants appeared in court on Monday, including Nitra-based businessman Norbert B., current House Vice-chair and former police chief (2012-18) Tibor G. and former special prosecutor Dusan K. [names abbreviated due to legal reasons]. In addition, former Financial Administration chief Frantisek I. and high-ranking officials of the now-defunct National Crime Agency (NAKA) Peter H., Marian Z., Robert K., Bernard S., Milan M. and businessman Boris T. took their seats in the dock. They are charged with setting up, orchestrating and supporting a criminal group, bribery and accepting bribes, and abusing public office. According to the indictment, the group was allegedly masterminded by Norbert B. Several of the defendants have publicly denied the charges on multiple occasions, labelling the trial politically motivated. "It was very important to hear the words of the presiding judge. He clearly articulated the issue of bias on the part of the law-enforcement authorities, specifically investigator Pavol D., as already noted in the Supreme Court's appellate decision. His bias was clearly stated there, and he has conducted procedures in these proceedings as well. Therefore, we'll use the time afforded by the adjournment to change the structure of evidence-taking or proposals for evidence, prioritising the assessment or the taking of evidence aimed at the bias of the law-enforcement authorities, namely this particular investigator. In this sense, it's already possible to suggest that the outcome of the proceedings is more than predictable," stressed defence lawyer Marek Para, who is representing Tibor G., Norbert B., Marian Z., Milan M. and Robert K. at the trial. According to the law, as Para explained, even a single procedure carried out by a biased law-enforcement official, such as an investigator, must lead to an acquittal. "I appreciate that the presiding judge said that - in line with the opinion made by the Supreme Court when deciding that the main trial would take place - all our arguments and objections must be addressed. Until now, we've only been submitting them without receiving any answers," added defendant Tibor G., who stated before the start of the hearing that he expects a lawful and fair trial. NOTE: This story has been updated in paragraph 2 and extended to include the final three paragraphs jrg/df