#17: Zaremba's Day in Court

It was a month later when it was Zaremba's turn. This is a long statement. If I knew then what I knew now, I think I would have had a hell of a lot more to say. But be that as it may, here’s the transcription.

#13 Zaremba’s testimony to the courts:

1. On may 15th, at about 2:00 PM I was driving in my Renault Megan which was my personal car. This was in Warsaw, on Solidarnoci, and we were going towards the Praga district. My daughter was in the car with me, 11 year old Katergina who I had taken from school and was heading home with.
2. We were riding towards Bankove Place at a distance of about 150 meters from the crossroads of Andersa. I was riding in the left lane in the middle lane was a city bus, which was slowing down because there was a red light. On the right side of the road I saw the biker who was riding very slowly and swerving. (Now, listen to this story carefully. This is the first time he is giving his story of the distance from the stop my moving in front of him took place. I of course say that I had already passed around the bus when he tried to drive around me, but he wants this to take place 150 meters from the stop. Now the main difference between these two locations is the speed we would all be going. The bus and Zaremba would both be going like 50 kph. Now he has me behind the bus, but moving slowly. How can this be? Read on and it will be clearer.)
3. In one moment he drove left, almost perpendicular to the left lane-in which I was driving-from one lane to another. In that place there are three lanes of traffic in one lace. In that time when the biker rode into my lane, I had to hit the brakes quickly so that he wouldn’t hit me. I used my horn, because I was afraid of contact because he was so close to my car. The biker reacted to the horn and went into the left lane. After slowing to a quick hard stop, I continued driving in the left lane. I went to the crossing. I stopped first at the lights. Behind me, there were a few cars, which had stopped on the left lane. (So, I move out of his lane, and end up behind the bus. Have you got the picture of this in your head? He and the bus are both moving at speed, but I am going slowly, but I swerve into his lane and he can stop and avoid the collision.
11. After stopping, I saw in the right rear view mirror, I saw the biker riding between the cars which were standing behind me on the left lane and the bus standing on the middle lane. I saw that he had troubles fitting between the cars, especially that he had the bus on the right, which was taking up almost all of the lane. During this ride, he was kicking his feet along the ground, rocking back and forth on the bike. (I tried really hard to make a point about this remark in several of the subsequent essays I wrote. As I was on a fixed wheel bike, a bike without a freewheel so the pedals turn along with the rear wheel, you can’t really make this move where you walk a bike along like you can on a regular bike. Small point, but I thought it important to add. But the bit is as important as any point there is to make about the believability of Zaremba’s story. You must remember how he has previously described the incident. This is what he says now.)
12. When he was riding next to my car, he put his right hand on the bus, and the left side of his handlebars into my car. (This again about the black mark theory.)
13. When he was in the middle of my car, he punched the roof three times, and kicked the front mirror… (At first there was no contact, I rode past but did nothing. The second account has me delivering a hit and the third several hits. Now it is three hits and a kick at the mirror- I am getting more violent as I go on. But READ WHAT HE SAYS NEXT:)
14. …He then lifted his bike up in front of him, and then he lifted it and threw it in front of the Renault, the bike hitting the front bumper. (Did you hear what the man said? Now, I did not ride past and then throw away the bike, return to the right side of the car and beat the roof and the window, here, I MUST LIFT THE BIKE OVER THE CAR, AND IN MY THROWING THE BIKE TO THE FRONT OF THE CAR, THE BIKE HIT THE BUMPER. This is not only a change in story; it is a statement I am sure he is making in an attempt to get his story closer to my own account so as to add credibility. Me, I said the same story every time, and turned in reports; Zaremba is bending his story to fit my description in the hopes of increasing his credibility…)
15. That man, yelling something in English, was acting like he was crazy. He hit several times in the front on the hood of the car on the right side, and he was kicking the right front mudguard… (Now, you see how he has reshaped the attack. And remember he is not telling the story in December, some six months after the incident. But also remember how I pointed out the differences in the damage reports? I think that that front mudguard was seriously damaged in the second crash. There is no damage at all there from the May 15th report. I don’t know how I can be taking the trouble to try and damage his car without actually causing any. )
16. He hit the front glass a few times with his fist, but not with the knuckles, only with the heel of his hand. He hit two or three times with his fist. Then he pushed the car, he was still yelling, he stopped for a moment next to the right front doors. (Ignoring the comedic melodrama of the following second, he is making an interesting picture of my fighting him while trapped next to the bus.)
17. In this moment when that situation began, my daughter started to cry, and started to become hysterical, and she was trying to hug me. I think that the look of this child made that man calm down for a moment. (But not calm enough because…)
18. But, after a few seconds, he want to the front, he picked up the bike and threw it between the barrier and the left side and my car. The some part of the bike into my car. The accused went over his bike, I mean I am not sure if he was standing on his bike, but he appeared on the left side of my car. He punched several times to the glass of my left front door and to the roof also a few times. He opened my door and punched me into my face.
19. I protected myself with my hands, the accused blocked the door with his straight leg and his body, he didn’t let me shut the door. He punched a few times into one side of my car, and as I think that he grabbed the antenna. (Now this bit would be while the door was open. Poor Zaremba is just sitting there while all of this is going on. No kick to the sternum, not shot at the testicles- no defense at all…)
20. I didn’t see that, but I heard the knocking of something metal into the roof. Then he was trying to get me out of the car, and he sent me a few punches more. He was punched into my face three times, two times into my jaw, and a few times into my shoulders, my sides, and my hands, which I was defending myself. (This is straight from Batman! Bam! Boom! KaPow! What does he do to defend against this 12 to fifteen punch combination?)
21. I leaned back into the chair, and I tried to push him with my legs out of the car. With my right hand, I took my mobile phone, and I chose the numbers 112, after hearing the voice of the answering machine, I was listening to the recording for a few seconds, but I had to defend myself… (Stop laughing! I mean it! This is serious. Wham! Bam! Boom! But only then does he try to call, he says he dials the number-forget about the clock on the phone being ten minutes off for a second- and this time actually gets to listen that the police will not be coming to save him because he only gets an answering machine. And remember, the medical damage to his person from this myriad of blows delivered by a very large New York City messenger was all of one mildly cut lip. Been in a fistfight lately? What happens to your body if you bump into something or stub your toe?)
22. Only the look of the phone, and that in was trying to use it, unbelievably calmed down the accused. I think he realized that I was calling for help, because I heard from his yelling the words, “from to police”. (From… to… Police… I can’t even justify speaking of this.)
23. He shouted a few more sentences, but a lot quieter, he left my door, he went in front of the car, and in his way. He pushed the rear view mirror and standing in front of the Renault, he leaned with all his body, like he was throwing himself on the front of my car, directly on the hood. (Now in the 2nd damage report, after his crash the hood apparently had become completely off its hinges. In the picture of the car from the 15th there is nothing like a great big dent on the hood: It is straight as an arrow in the picture and the police report confirms this. Again, If I really did what he claimed, I would have dented the hood quite deeply, yes? Why does he add this detail? And also, why does he want me, while my bike is apparently sitting now to the left of his car, to walk back in front of a running car just to lean on the hood. And if I did, why the hell didn’t he try to run me over? Well, I’ll tell you why: In the second report of damages, the hood is off its hinges. Zaremba want’s to blame me for this. This detail comes up again in a minute, and really this is a very foolish remark for Zaremba to make. But for the moment, let’s go back to the issue at hand. Now remember that according to this story, all of this must have taken a long time. I pointed this out in my Power Point. Remember that there is supposed to be a cop car behind us. Why hasn’t anybody done anything to help him?)
24. Then he picked up his bike, he sat on it and rode towards to Solidarnoci street, and on the passage which is next to the Muronow cinema and Andersa street. At this moment he was riding away, a man came to me and said and he said that behind me there is a police car. I looked at what the accused was doing. He was riding forward and backward through the passage, and looking at me. (We are 150 meters from the police station. There are at that moment 40 cops standing there out in front. There were also probably 40 people standing there waiting for the buses, the tram or waiting to cross the street.)
25. I ran to the cop’s car a few meters behind me and I asked for help. I asked for them to stop the accused. They used the siren and they went to the left and to Andersa street and I did the same with my car. The cop’s car was blocked by another car, and so he left behind, and I drove Andersa street, and then we went to the parking lot next to the KSP. (Again, if this radio car was only a few meters behind him, are you telling me that they didn’t see any of this? But what exactly happened here? Did the cop use the siren and go, or was he blocked? And wait a while and you will here a second version of this later in this testimony.)
26. In the parking there were several cop cars there, there were a few uniformed policemen who were standing next to the cars. I asked them for a reaction in the accused case, who was still riding in the passage. After a few minutes, sorry, I don’t know how much time did it take, a few policemen went in the direction of the accused and he stood up from the bike and he went in my direction yelling something, and again he was trying to hit me. The policeman split us up. (Now get this straight as well. HE GETS THE POLICE TO STOP ME, BUT I MANAGE TO GET ALL THE WAY OF TO HIM DESPITE THIS. And remember that the last line of the second story was “then the police took control”. )
27. After telling the story, they took out documents, the accused, and mine and then after using the radio, they sent us to the police station. There they checked the car, and photos were taken. I told the story the story. And for now this is all that I have to say... (They handed him a copy of his previous statements)
28. After READING: Agrees. I noticed certain differences in some evidence I ascertained, that accused more than 2 times threw the bike… In some moments, there are places where there are differences in the order of chronology… (That was all he said, and apparently this was satisfying enough to the court. Someone asked him how long this attack lasted.)
29. This event lasted 2-3 minutes and it is necessary was to specify lots of facts. (I don’t know if he is admitting that he needs the attack to go on for a long time so that he can justify what damages he wants to claim or not, but this line sure sounds like it comes from my report.)
30. Certain things I do not remember and I did not talk about in earlier testimonies. Some of my details were not following in the same order, and I simply may have forgot forget about some others.
31. ON QUESTION OF LADY PRESIDENT: I confirm what I witnessed in preparatory conduct. In preparatory conduct I said that accused, after being stopped by the policemen, struck me in face. Today I say that former this was only an attempt to hit me. (I though he made it all quite clear that I hit him. He said it twice quite plainly enough. I guess he could not get any of the police to testify that they saw this.)
32. I want to correct this and to say that accused tried to strike me in face but me but did not because I avoided this by dodging and shielding my face with my hands. (Ahaaa… The following are all answers to questions that are not written in the text.)
33. FROM QUESTIONS OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: The glass of the car did not come out, but had a starry crack in it. I did not replace the glass after the event. I sold the car with this with damage after 1 and 1/2 months.
34. I did not notify the insurance company about the damages.
35. My daughter was locked to my right side in the front seat with a shoulder strap. As far as estimating the cost of the damages, I consulted with familiar varnisher. (STOP. If we are talking about his initial claim, made at the station on May 15th, there was no way for him to have spoken to the man between the time of the incident and the time it took to drive to the police station. And, if he is talking about the estimate following the SECOND ACCIDENT, HE IS DIRECTLY CHARGING ME WITH THESE EXTRA DAMAGES IN COURT. The familiar car painter would be I suppose his witness Jablonski, who will talk later in the day. This though folks, is an admission of perjury. What does he say about this?)
36. In preparatory conduct I said that sum given by the expert does not embrace all of costs. (He confirms this. He is saying that the estimate of the costs WHICH INCLUDE DAMAGES CAUSED BY A SECOND ACCIDENT ARE ALSO INSUFFICIENT TO COVER THE DAMAGES. He said it in court folks.)
37. ON QUESTIONS OF DEFENDER: (Now this is my guy Boris asking questions. Borus as far as I know had never said one single word about the differences in the estimates and I didn’t know about it until months after this. And clearly, no one was going to make a big point of telling me either. )
38. Before the sale, the car was not repaired. I sold the car to the wife of Jablonski. (Who insured the car?)
39. Car was insured in Cigna Company S.
40. When accused was getting to my car along the line between the autobus and me. I saw this in the right mirror. When he was halfway to the front of the car, he lifted up the bike and then made several steps in front of my car, and then threw the cycle on the street and some of the bike fell on the car and on the bumper. (OK, so now this is a new variation on the theme. Now, I am not standing there and fighting, Now, I am not riding past while delivering 1, 2 or 3 kicks- How many different ways can Mr. Zaremba try and tell the stupid story? The real difference here though, is by changing the basic premise of the story to account for that “black mark”, is admitting to a picture that is pretty much the one I tried to show as being the truth from day 1. I wrote a long essay about just this moment. If it is possible for me to pass by the back of the car, but not the front, that implies that the car was stopped at an angle and not straight. Now remember we are in tight quarters here. There is only about 60 cm between the car and the bus, and of course the bus is taller than I am. It would be very easy to close the gap beyond the limits that my bike could ride through. But if I can only pass the back and not the front, he must have stopped in that way- or skidded to a stop in that way- and this has been my point all along. The following are all answers to questions. )
41. I stopped nearest of bus from regard to Wyprofilowanie Street because the lanes there go in the direction I was going. I am not enemy of cyclists, and rather believe that for Goodman drivers of cars are his enemies. It does not hinder me that cyclists will ride with the cars, but is this was not peaceable with the rules.
42. But cyclists should watch out not to be in conflict with cars because there could perhaps be an accident. (Again, if he is trying to tell me that he was trying to run me over for my own good because he didn’t like my being in front of him, I would say he could go straight to hell. But, listen to what he says next about that car that was allegedly in back of him. Now, you must understand that this cop car is not Jucha. It is someone else who has never had the slightest thing to do with this situation regardless of the potentiality that they would be a witness to the events. Borus asks him what happened to that car.
43. This radio car, which was found behind me at the crossing probably went on command, but I am not certain. (It was important enough for them to use the siren. It was important enough for them follow (or lead) Zaremba to the station. Where are they now? How many times did the lights change?)
44. I am not in a position to say how many times they changed. They surly changed several times because the bus and the cars all went on. (OK, but I thought you said that the radio car was blocked? Again I asked what happened to the radio car?)
45. The Radio car stood in the right lane ready to turn on Marszalkowska Street. I do not know whether I asked policemen from this of radio car whether saw this event. I went before everyone to try and make the arrest of the accused. (In my report from October I took the speed limit of the of the street and figured how many seconds a radio car would have the ability to see an event taking place. If Zaremba wants to insist that this was a more than one-minute event, and specifically that the bus left the scene, there is no way these cops could not have seen anything. And what is more, he now moves them from several meters in back of him, to the right lane. And better yet, look again at the picture; Zaremba is not in uniform. What does he say to the cops to get their attention? To even get them to turn on the siren? I am sorry folks; this man is not speaking from his memory, but from his imagination. Now, that being said, I seriously do not understand this next remark at all. I believe that it has something to do with smirking at me about how little help I got in fighting my case. In any case, it is adding insult to injury.)
46. If this would have been a conflict or a quiet conversation between participants I suppose that it would not be a problem finding a witness. But from the regard that he was acting like a raving madman, I rate that this was why nobody hurried with giving help. (He is next asked why he left the scene of the accident?)
47. I do not know whether it was right to leave then, but most important for me was to arrest the accused. I was afraid that the accused would escape from the place of the event, I saw him 200-300 meters away and I drove after and covered the way. I do not remember if during incidents I said something to the accused. (My feeling is that he left because 1. I was heading straight to the police and 2, his car was stopped at an odd angle in the street and he would rather not have to explain that. I never heard this previous statement about why he had no witnesses. Twardowski didn’t translate it well and the point was missed. The Judge asked him if he had in fact tried to break my finger during our altercation. During my testimony, I had mentioned that I was pointing my finger at him.)
48. I was at such a moment in defending myself and blocking punches that I seized finger of accused. It was while protecting myself. I do not remember whether this was before I was pushing the accused with my legs or after. I held this finger and I tried to twist it off. (Of course you know, I was pointing that finger at him while I was telling him that he was an ass for having driven into me. I thought that the court was really on my side at that moment, but of course, it wasn’t. They asked him about the damages to his person)
49. During this incident, I experienced disturbing of teeth on the left side of my face. Two of them became chipped. I had hemotoma (a cut) on my upper lip on the left side The bones in my cheek ached and all the left side of my face. I had difficulties from speaking; I felt pain at touching and turning with head. (Again though, the medical report does not agree that his teeth were broken. And, this is a really small amount of damage if he is going to claim 10 to 15 hits. He was asked where he was going that day and a few questions about Wiesniakowski’s telling me in front of a witness that Zaremba said he had wanted to get a gun and shoot me.)
50. I planned to take Solidarności over the Ślasko-Dąbrowski Bridge to Radzyminską. As a policeman I work for the Department Of road traffic KSP. I have the right to bear weapons just like every policeman. On this of day I did not have any weapons with me. I absolutely did not say in presence of the public prosecutor that I had intention to use weapons in relation to the accused. (At this point it was my turn to ask questions. I thought I wanted to hear more specifics from him, still figuring his story could be proved false. I asked him his relationship to the bike when he passed Orla Street, about 250 meters from the stop by my measurement. Orla street figured in my estimates of how much time that alleged cop car would have had while driving towards the stop.)
51. ON QUESTIONS OF ACCUSED: Exactly I will not be able to qualify when I most likely passed Orla Street (But I knew that this was my chance to catch him in a lie about his story. I think from the beginning, I laid all of my hopes on the real difficulty in constructing a believable story from lies. The problems lie in preparation and in details. Now certainly, if you got the whole of the court system simply giving it to you no matter what you say or do, this adds some extra ground. But I thought that this was my chance to really crack his story. And, in fact I did. Well at least as far as rational thinkers or actual justice types might be concerned. I wish I had known more than I did. But nevertheless, This was my questioning: How far from me were you when you first saw me?)
52. I do not know how far I was from the stop when I first saw accused. (When I made my so-called move in front of you, what was the distance between you and the bus?)
53. Distance between my car and the bus was a good 5 meters. I was going about 40-50km/h. (Now this is big. I mean, it is really big. Now, remember that he wants us to believe that my move to cut in front of him was 150 meters before the stop. Well folks; look at the picture he is making. If the bus is only five meters in front of him, that, means that the bus is also going about the same speed he is. Now first of all, remember that he testified that he saw me out in front of him riding slowly toward the bus. Now, this is probably a visual memory (a real one) because it implies that the bus has stopped and I am about to go around it. In my account of course, the guy decides to tear around me like and idiot, and then tries to hip-check on the way past. In that case, the stories kinda mesh. But if he is saying that the distance between he and the bus was five meters, the only possible picture he would make was that HE WAS FIVE METERS BEHIND THE BUS AT THE STOP WHEN I WENT AROUND THE BUS. This would also be as well perhaps a justification for his actions. BUT HE DOESN’T SAY THIS. What he says is that this happens 150 meters back and at speed. And let me tell you folks, if it did happen this way, than Einstein is rolling over in his grave because it is a physical impossibility in this world. Firstly, I would have top be going at the same speed as the bus. Not only is this really hard to do, but he said it wasn’t the case. But secondly, think of the size of the bike- He want’s us to believe that I can cut in and cause a problem within a distance of only five meters; This…simply… can’t… happen. I would have to do this in the space of 1/3 of a second. What is 1/3 of a second? Say the word “second” out loud. 1/3 of a second elapsed in the time it took you to get to the letter “c”. He reconfirms that he has no idea what he is talking about a few sentences later. It is a lie. Get it? He lied! Anyway, I went on: Do you know the speed limit there?)
54. The speed limit for his place is 50km/h. On the left lane in front of me there was no car. I speak about section of crossing Al. Solidarności and Andersa. I was going slower than the limitation of speed, because I was getting to crossings. (Just a note, if he is telling us he was going slower than the limit, this is also a lie. Polish drivers are speed freaks and ten minutes spent out at the intersection would tell you that people do not even apply their brakes until about 80 meters from the stop, about the time they reach the fence of the tramway. Was the bus stopped?)
55. The bus was not stopped. (‘Nother small point. But lest us remind ourselves of what we heard only a few short minutes ago: “ We were riding towards Bankove Place at a distance of about 150 meters from the crossroads of Andersa. I was riding in the left lane in the middle lane was a city bus, which was slowing down because there was a red light. On the right side of the road I saw the biker who was riding very slowly and swerving.” This was the second statement of the text. Not from questions, this is what he himself wanted to say. The bus is moving at the same speed as he is, he says he sees me for a good long time, and he has said in the past that he “saw” that I was “getting to the bus”. Am I making my point clearly? His story works great if he would just admit that we were at the stop and he bloody well drove around me like a lunatic. He story doesn’t hold water and it gets worse. When was the first time you saw me?)
56. I do not know exactly when was the first time I saw the accused but taking under consideration my distance to the crossing with Andersa it would be about 200 meters before. Mr. Goodman went slowly and zigzagged into the right lane. (Now, I know I have him. And if the court was following or had even the slightest care to have a clue, they would have gotten it too. )
57. I did not pass the accused when he came around the bus because the bus was in front of the cyclist. I do not know whether I went the same speed as the bus, I did not measure the speed of the bus. The bus was nearer the crossing and had to stop at the signal. The cyclist surely moved slower than bus. When cyclist wanted to cut in front of my way I was about 120 meters from the crossing. (Now I would say he knew he was caught in a lie. OI say this because his next statement was:)
58. I am not however sure exactly. (Anyway, I hope I made my point here. The bus is but five meters in front. I am both riding slowly and at sufficient speed to deal with the bus and the car. Folks, even if we are not at the stop, if the bus is slowed down sufficiently for a slow moving zigzagging biker (And I was riding slowly, too) We are at the stop and not some 120 or 150 meters away. Even his next statement about seeing me the whole time, while probably true, could also not be true if the bus was riding along with him five meters in front of him- or even moving at all for that matter.)
59. Of course I braked, especially in the moment when I noticed that the cyclist came into on my lane. From moment of noticing the accused to the moment of getting close by the bus at the crossing, I saw accused almost the whole time. When I passed the accused I remember that I did not see him (in the moment). (I asked him again to describe the angle. It was the same problem of translations as had been in the prosecutor’s office and both Zaremba and the Judge jumped on me about repeating questions. I argued that I was not repeating the questions, but they now stopped me from asking more.)
60. I already said in previous testimony, that the cyclist entered my lane in almost a straight angle to my lane I feel that the accused did not occupy completely the left lane. He made his cut into the left lane and after I applied the brake and used a sound signal, (he) rode down center lane. (How far was my bike ahead of you when this happened?)
61. In this time when accused, making an almost straight line, (he) entered my lane about 5-7 of meters (ahead of me). (Were there any cars behind you?)
62. Behind me was one car. Used to be no cars, but why quibble. If he remembers things a little differently, these are small matters when we are only dealing with a couple of years of a man’s life. But I obviously am asking good questions because he really, really needs us to know how important it is for him to get me. Listen:)
63. On the center lane was a city bus. I did not see how many cars were in the lane. The most important thing for me was the situation with the cyclist. (How many cars were behind you?)
64. When I stopped before the crossing behind me there were at least 3 cars. Exactly I do not remember. I am not in a position to describe the relationship to the wheel of this cycle. I received for the car exactly 17,000 zlotys. (I couldn’t think of any more questions. If I was doing this now, I mean if I could have heard all of what he had said when he had said it, rather than having to find this stuff after I finally had these documents translated, some three months later, I certainly would have made this all a but more clear. This however, was not the case. I was certainly not prepared and more so, I was not thinking very clearly. The court record shows:)
65. The accused and his defender have no more questions to witness. (At this time we took a beak for lunch. When we went back in, the questioning continued from the prosecutor:)
66. ON QUESTION FROM THE LADY PRESIDENT: I was struck in the side of (my) face. The accused opened the car door but I tried to hold (it closed). (The Judge asked him if it was true that he grabbed my finger. This was a detail in my testimony where I said that I was pointing my finger at him and telling him what an ass I thought he was. I guess, as this detail had always escaped Zaremba- he was very gentle in he defense from me don’t you know- he had neglected to mention it.)
67. I seized the accused’s finger and pushed him away with my legs. I purchased the car in November 2001. It was a used car. It was 5 years old. (Now folks, my thinking was that the judge was really on my side here because of what she asked next. Looking back, I don’t know why I relied on subtlety rather than directly asking, but anyway, she did and we got an answer. Why the trial did not come to an end at that moment, I will never know. And really, and I am not joking because it simply wasn’t translated, I didn’t hear what was said next at that moment. I really wish I had. She asked him if the car had had a previous accident.)
68. This car had an accident in January or February of 2002. I drove off the road and I struck a tree. The results of the damage was a broken front bumper, front belt, broken headlamps, the dummy, as it is called; the hood, the cooler and condenser of the air-conditioning. The roof was not damaged. The car was repaired in a workshop and an insurance firm paid for the repair. This workshop is found at the corner of Ząbkach and Księcia Skorupk Street. The records of the repair are at the insurance firm. This was at the end of January. (Now this is Jablonski’s shop. He tells us straight out that he makes his living by being able to undercut the legitimate body shop. Zaremba got an estimate from one place, and Jablonski did whatever he did to repair the car for something less. But be all that as it may, he just admitted to being a fraud from the start. However, his fraud does not come to an end at this time. Right here, he is going to try and tell us that he can tell you the differences in the damages. But listen to what he says about the hood:)
69. As a result of the events of the 15th of May the following was damaged: A small flaw on right back mudguard and right back door. An indent to the right of the front mudguard, an indent and unhinging of the cover of the engine…(Ok. The unhinging of the engine cover is something I have pointed out before. I don’t know why Zaremba wants to even try to pin this on me. But he does, and he adds in the story of my leaning with all of my weight on the hood. Wanna know why we really shouldn’t believe him? Because the “car expert” himself, Robert Kalinowski told us so in his “expert opinion”: “On the basis of the photos and on inspection of the car, no one can say if the front mask was damaged. One can only say that it was painted, this is why one cannot say that the damages could be caused by a bare hand.” And this is a good call because the hood in the pictures is quite obviously straight. I believe that statement was point number three. But for the sake of moving along, how do we really know there was indeed a second accident? Well, for one thing the damages in the two reports don’t match. But better, even though no one asks Zaremba about this during this testimony (And I wasn’t even aware of the damage report!), Jablonski, one of Zaremba’s own witnesses will tell us about it later on in the day. Zaremba goes on)… a crack of the windshield on the right side near upper corner, dents of the roof on the right and left side, scratches on the bumper, a broken off radio - antenna, an indent on the roof from the back center near the antenna of the cellular telephone. I do not remember if it was possible, that there were other damages. I did not execute the repair at my own cost. (He just doesn’t remember if there were other damages. He has two accident reports, he is claiming damages in court, he has had six months to try and concoct this cockamamie story, but he just don’t rememba… I can’t stand it folks, he just can’t rememba…The judge asked about his teeth.)
70. As a result of the hit I went to the dental clinic. I had dental treatment but I do not have any record of the payment. I do not have any of the bills connected to this. (The Judge asked him to clarify that statement:)
71. I clarify that I do not remember whether I have any bills connected to this. (Can you feel me? He just can’t rememba… Zaremba can’t rememba if he had any medical bills. It just slipped from his mind, effortlessly and on gossamer wings. Such a trivial thought. And all of it so very trivial. So very, very trivial…)
72. Because of what I was told when I sold it, the car was sold below value. On the day of the sale, this car this was worth about 22-23,000 zlotys. I sold it for only 17,000 zlotys. (How have you been harmed? This again from the judge.)
73. Harm to my person connected to this is first of all with the stress connected to my daughter. This money then is for satisfaction for doing me harm. I want to add that from regard to specific work done (to my teeth) I did not continue treatment. (Uh… right. I got to ask questions again, but the Judge determined that I was asking the same questions again. I really didn’t know what to ask. I hadn’t heard all that was said, I didn’t know the form: I simply couldn’t do the job that needed to be done. I wish I could have done better, but I didn’t. I asked two more limp questions before they shut me out completely:)
74. The accused entered into my lane crossed the white line in front of my wheel. I do not know what the distance from this of line was.
75. ON QUESTION OF DEFENDER: (Why didn’t you report this to the insurance company?) Insurance - Firm does not have to pay indemnity, if the originator is known. I stopped my car insurance.

And that was that. I think all of that was clear enough. But apparently it was not clear enough for the court.