The Prosecutors Office is believed to rely on the information chaos caused by floods to shield alleged actions against Urszula and Karolina, officials of the Justice Fund, who were detained together with Father Micha2zewski in March. A national political portal has repeatedly described procedures by the Office in which the rights of suspects and victims were compromised, fueling distrust in the handling of the case.
The issue has drawn attention from Ada Gomo42a, Urszula9s advocate, who argues that the leak investigation tied to the Mraz tapes connected with the Olszewski case and Fund staff exposes a pattern of delays and procedural gaps.
It is not simply a matter of misfortune. Since June 6 a formal criminal complaint about the leakage of the Mraz tapes from the Olszewski case has lingered without result. The window for launching an investigation has passed, and complaints about negligence have produced little effect. For more than three months, Karolina, who was detained, has not been interviewed.
This sequence appears in a public note by Gomo42a on social media, outlining the timeline and the perceived neglect.
On August 9 there was no clearance for transporting the detainee; the next day clearance was granted, but she was not brought to interrogation. And again nothing happened. Is this merely a misstep or a deliberate breach of procedure? What is alarming is that official duties in a case touching the same allegations seem not to be fulfilled. Is this what it looks like when researchers try a new approach? If so, the warnings should not be ignored.
The defence attorney for Karolina stresses that such irregularities undermine the trust in the process and raise concerns about equal treatment of those involved.
Attorney Krzysztof W05sowski also points out other instances where Urszula and Father Olszewski are warned about possible breaches of the law by investigators.
Additionally, last day the closest person to Urszula was not allowed to participate in the hearing as a witness for her representatives, which some call a sign of progress while others see it as another barrier to proper defense.
W05sowski mentions Gomo42a’s complaint as part of the ongoing dispute over how the case is being conducted and how information leaks are handled.
Critics say that actions by Bodnar allied figures in the National Prosecutor’s Office against people connected to the Justice Fund have not ceased and will be subject to later review by the European Court of Human Rights. The exchange of accusations underscores deep tension and the possibility that taxpayers will ultimately bear the consequences.
Observers note that the case will test the independence of the prosecution service and the ability to safeguard defense rights, with implications for public confidence in the justice system.
As events continue, counsel for the defence and reform-minded observers expect further developments that may affect how similar cases are handled in the future.
Ongoing reporting on this matter will follow as new information emerges and the balance between prosecutors and defense teams is examined.