In august 2013 Martha was allowed to go to Poland.
She fulfills the request of one of the Garda officers, and sends postcards with greetings to the Garda post. She attaches a commemorative 1 grosz “for luck”.
This sending was treated as taunting of Garda. The proceedings were initiated, fingerprints were taken from the postcard and 1 grosz.
Prosecutor, during the trial in court, said that Martha used the car as a “murder weapon”.
It’s probably the first case in history of European forensics, that nobody has taken fingerprints from the “murder weapon”.
Sticking to the terminology of the prosecutor: Due to the lack of fingerprints taken from the car – the prosecutor doesn’t even knows who held this alleged “murder weapon”, who pulled the symbolic “trigger”.
Stating, that Martha’s car was used as a “murder weapon” is far from truth.
Why prosecutor’s statement, that Martha’s car was used as a “murder weapon” can’t be true?
Or maybe Garda’s actions were correct?
Fingerprints were not taken from the car, only water samples were taken: both from the river (site of accident) and from the sea (place where Csaba’s body was found).
The cause of Csaba’s death was not car but… water.