In a case that has sparked significant media attention and political controversy, Ewa Wrzosek, the prosecutor involved in the interrogation of Barbara Skrzypek, has firmly denied any wrongdoing following Skrzypek's death just three days after her questioning. Wrzosek described suggestions that Skrzypek's death was linked to the interrogation as "scandalous," asserting that she adhered to procedural standards "to a higher degree than average."
Barbara Skrzypek, a long-time associate of PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński, was interrogated on March 12, 2025, as part of an investigation into the Srebrna company and its controversial plans to build two skyscrapers in Warsaw. The interrogation, conducted by Wrzosek, included lawyers representing Gerald Birgfellner, who is a victim in the case. Three days later, on March 15, Skrzypek died from what preliminary autopsy results indicated was a heart attack.
Wrzosek, who has been a prosecutor for 30 years, emphasized that during the interrogation, Skrzypek did not report any significant health issues, only stating she had difficulty reading the protocol without her glasses. "This is a condition that likely affects about 50% of the population," Wrzosek stated, defending her actions during the interrogation.
Despite her reassurances, members of the PiS party have linked Skrzypek's death to the stress of the interrogation process, particularly criticizing Wrzosek for her decision to not allow Skrzypek's legal representative to attend. Wrzosek responded to these claims by stating, "A legal representative is not a paramedic," and argued that if there had been any concerns about Skrzypek's health, a medical expert should have been called to assess her condition.
The District Prosecutor's Office Warsaw-Praga is currently investigating the circumstances surrounding Skrzypek's death, specifically looking into whether there was any unintentional wrongdoing involved. Wrzosek has expressed hope that the investigation will clearly demonstrate that there is no causal link between the interrogation and Skrzypek's death.
Wrzosek's comments came during a media briefing where she reiterated her commitment to following proper procedures. "I have nothing to reproach myself for in this matter," she declared. She also criticized the media narrative surrounding the case, describing it as a "media smear campaign" intended to divert attention from the actual proceedings.
In light of the controversy, Kaczyński himself has suggested a connection between the interrogation and Skrzypek's death, citing scientific studies. He indicated that the absence of a legal representative could have heightened the stress associated with the interrogation, potentially impacting Skrzypek’s health.
Jacek Dubois, one of the lawyers present during Skrzypek's interrogation, countered the claims of stress, stating he observed no signs of distress during the questioning. "I saw an open person willing to engage in conversation, who initiated discussions on topics of interest to her," Dubois reported. He also noted that Skrzypek did not express any desire to contact her legal representative during the session.
As the investigation unfolds, Wrzosek has faced increasing scrutiny from both the media and political opponents, who question her impartiality and the decisions made during the interrogation. In response, she has maintained that her actions were justified and that no complaints had been filed regarding the conduct of the interrogation.
Wrzosek's position has drawn both support and criticism within the political landscape. While some defend her adherence to protocol, others argue that the refusal to allow legal representation during such a significant interrogation could have serious implications for the rights of witnesses.
As the public awaits the findings of the ongoing investigation, the case has raised broader questions about the intersection of legal processes and political influence in Poland. The scrutiny of Wrzosek's actions highlights the challenges faced by prosecutors working on high-profile cases, particularly those involving powerful political figures.
In a climate where media narratives can shape public perception, the implications of this case extend beyond the individuals involved, touching on the integrity of the legal system and the accountability of public officials. As Wrzosek prepares to continue her testimony, the outcomes of this investigation could have lasting effects on both her career and the political landscape in Poland.
