Activists in Warsaw also attended the third hearing of the Sokołów Podlaski youth, who organized a protest against the Women’s Holiday following the Przyłębska Tribunal’s decision on abortion on 28 October 2020.
“There are a lot of people from Ukraine in Sokolov. More than 300 “
“It is reported that PESEL spends 500”
“Workers of meat processing plants brought their families here”
“Of course they need help, but can Poland afford it?”
Worked to protest a year and a half ago
A third hearing on women’s protests a year and a half ago seems strange in this context. However, the court is questioning another witness – the police.
The criminal case against several young people, including two police officers, the police officer was unexpectedly after the verdict of the abortion participants of large march participants and the police opening from the police. The crowd and the crowd at once did not move on the sidewalk. He set off. It was not only Sokolov’s main street, but also a state road.
At a previous meeting, before the start of the war in Ukraine, police tried to testify and accuse the organizers of the action. On April 12, a pre-trial police witness testified and changed his tone openly. He also softened his statements during the investigation.
He was responsible for the security of the rally. He said that two days earlier, two young women organizers came to him. He explained to them that such a protest was difficult and that the issue could get out of control. The organizers assured him that they would try to avoid swearing and cling to the sidewalk (the fact is that the width of the sidewalk varies along the route – OKO.press saw there). The witness advised the organizers to choose more people to help, because they will not be able to come to their senses.
This showed that the police knew how difficult the task was for the young women. In the meantime For the two organizers, this was the first protest in their lives. They wanted it, because the issue is very serious, it is impossible to speak in public. They discussed the route with the police and chanted slogans (not vulgar, because “the elders always say that young people are vulgar, that’s not the point”).
Police promised to help them – a witness testified – and sent about 12 police officers.
There were passwords, but it is not known who voiced them
However, 450-500 people (according to other estimates, about 1,000 people) came to the action. Those in front chanted slogans, and suddenly a megaphone appeared, and a witness behind heard unsuccessful swearing.
The court concluded (although not everything was later recorded):
- Siksin PiS,
- Morawiecki, xain prick,
- Get out.
The witness made it clear that he did not know whether the slogans were chanted by the accused organizers (nor were they). He even said it was chanted by other people who joined the rally and took the megaphone with the slogan “Fuck PiS”.
When the police prosecutor asked how angry the residents were at the protest, he said a woman told him to “let go” and waved.
He did not talk to anyone else. On the other hand, even if cars parked on the street give an audible signal when a lane is occupied, “there may be noise with the intention of supporting.”
The women’s march is not a procession
It took the court the most time to determine how the mass march of citizens protesting to defend their rights came to the side of the road. The witness said that although it was the main street of the city, traffic was weak on Saturday evening. Nothing bad happened – but it was dangerous. Everything ended well, and in the end the police organizers thanked him
but – the witness said – we do not deserve this gratitude.
OKO.press drew a similar conclusion from the statements of colleagues at the previous meeting: the police did not assess the determination of women and did not involve the necessary forces. The protest got out of control, but no matter how angry the people, it ended with slogans and two torches. The cars were waiting for the procession to pass.
Now the witness added some interesting details: public parades are held relatively often in Sokolów, but because they are religious, the organizers are free to inform the traffic police about it. They can get his belt. The women’s protest required such an interview, but it should not be obvious to people living in a religious world.
“But aren’t we going to compare women’s protests to funerals?” The lawyer went too far in this defense, “the witness said in response to another question from the defense.
Ukrainians return from Sokolov to defend the country
This time it took two hours to learn the truth. During the women’s protests, the court must question another witness before considering whether Sokolov had committed a crime, whether it was harmful, and what values might be more important. This is the last police officer, who, unfortunately, has been undergoing a three-month training in the other part of Poland since yesterday. The court will try to bring him to the court in a month.
“I don’t remember any of them anymore, it’s been a long time,” said one of the children accused of using the torch.
“Do you know the organizers of the action?”
– How old were you then?
After the trial, everyone stopped again and talked about Ukraine
“I was amazed when the children who had a good job in Sokolov began to return to Ukraine to fight. Now, you know, the girls are back! ”
“But some Ukrainians are ugly towards Poles, I’ve heard it myself.”
“Good, but some Poles behave badly abroad”
“But can we keep them?”
I ask the witness: “Your testimony shows that it is difficult to organize a meeting. The girls understood. “
The witness shook his head, but added: “And there were no elders in the city, how could they better understand that?”
Members of the audience who came from Warsaw to greet the accused asked, “Is that why you are dragging them to court?”
The witness is serious (because so far the conversation is very friendly): “Look, we are police. We cannot rule out the possibility that a group of drunken protesters may swear in public. That’s what the trial is about. “
And here the witness turns to the girls (the boys have already left): “The court will tell you, not me, whether you have the right to do so or not. That’s what the trial is about. ”