2. The Presiding Judge of the High Court ILLEGALLY constituted the 3-judge panels and obviously assigned the case in violation of the random principle and as a result this panel of judges EXECUTED us. On a side note, does anyone really believe that the case was assigned randomly to this particular and infamous panel? Please! And if assignment was targeted – and it obviously was – why did they do it? Evidently, they were preparing said EXECUTION. By law, the illegal constitution of the panel shall result in the annulment of the decision given in this case! The story concerning the illegal constitution of 5-judge and 3-judge panels makes a lot of sense and must be dealt with by the Government and Parliament under the decisions of the Constitutional Court. I am very well placed to know this as someone who was at the receiving end of such illegality and abuse.
3. One of the convicted persons in this case, Giurgiucanu Georgica, was right to point out that the leadership of the High Court falsely enforced Decision 80/2017 concerning the appointment of panels in 2018. The media had already reported on this on many occasions. But Decision 80/2017 DOES NOT EXIST and neither does the minutes of this decree supposedly given by the Ruling Board of the High Court. Giurgiucanu went so far as to alert the Judicial Inspection and the CSM [High Council of the Magistracy], and he filed a criminal complaint. Not a very smart decision, it turned out, as less than two months later he was given 5 years and 6 months in prison. Unfortunately, I was part of the same contract, legally tied to him, so I was given the same conviction.
4. The entire Movila case that led to my conviction, one of the abovementioned 6 cases, is based on one thing only: an alleged illegal deed of assignment of litigious rights which according to the prosecutors involved exceeding the legal limits of the underlying mandate signed 17 years ago in 2002. However, 4 civil court decisions showing the claimants’ actual rights in this case exist and were filed at the ICCJ at the hearing before the last. While the prosecutors did not see this evidence at the time of the investigation, and neither did the Court of Appeal of Bucharest, the court of first instance in this case, the Black Panel judges, subservient to the system, simply overlooked it. Moreover, even if the deed of assignment had been signed by exceeding the legal limits of the mandate, they would only have had a civil case with no grounds for criminal convictions. At most, said deeds and subsequent contracts could have been annulled. In addition, land titles were issued under Special Act 10, and art. 36 of this act clearly states the criminal consequences for breaking it during the process of recovery of possession by filing forged documents or claiming an illegal right of recovery. Such penalty has been time barred for many years now and said article was repealed in 2014. So naturally at present this alleged wrongdoing no longer bears criminal consequences. But the judges wrongly and absurdly interpreted this as aiding and abetting the abuse of office and ordered many years in prison 17 years after the crime was allegedly committed.
5. As for me, while no one understands in what way the employees of the City Hall of Constanta were guilty of abuse of office, I was charged with aiding and abetting the abuse of office although I literally did nothing. All I did was give power of attorney to Giurgiucanu Georgica to deal with the paperwork related to the recovery of possession under the law. This was my horrible crime! I did not file any document or petition, I did not receive any document, I did not sign anything. And, obviously, I did not talk with anyone. There is no evidence for these charges. It is unbelievable!
6. The Court of Appeal of Bucharest, the court of first instance, sentenced me to 3 years in prison with suspension of execution and the infamous ICCJ Black Panel presided by judge Ionut Matei – head of the ICCJ intelligence service – doubled the initial conviction, ordering 5 years and 6 months in prison WITHOUT ANY NEW EVIDENCE. Under the ECHR opinion and this court’s case law, this constitutes a violation of the right to a fair trial as guaranteed by art. 6, paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I am referring here to the conviction in my own case, but let it be said in passing that after 25 defendants were acquitted by the court of first instance, the higher court made of corrupt judges sentenced them to many years in prison without any new evidence, simply by absurdly reinterpreting the so-called evidence on file.
7. Even admitting that the offenses I supposedly committed and for which I was convicted actually existed, given the time that had passed since the so-called offenses the court of appeal, namely the ICCJ Black Panel, should have given a minimum conviction as provided by the law and suspended the prison sentence – as per the standard practice of the European Human Rights Court. At the time of the so-called crime I was 28. Now I am 45. This is about an alleged crime from 17 years ago. In light of the above, my attorneys explained that the conviction I was given under these circumstances infringes on the principle of opportunity of criminal trials as evidenced in EHRS case law.
8. As I showed above, I was convicted for aiding and abetting the abuse of office by public servants and sentenced to 3 years of suspended prison time, but the judge never issued a rationale and therefore I was unable to defend myself. The only reasoning given was contained in one sentence referring to my use of a deed of assignment that the court deemed as forgery because it was signed under a mandate whose limits had been exceeded, as I mentioned above. The court also found that I used this deed to determine the issuance of illegal land titles. This is not even true as all I did was give power of attorney. Moreover, with respect to the absence of rationale for the court decision above, this constitutes absolute grounds for quashing said decision and remanding it for retrial. Additionally, the court did not even rule on an offense I was charged with. As such, this decision given by the ICCJ Black Panel blatantly violates – in my case, at least – the OBLIGATION of the court to quash it and remand it for trial to the court of first instance under art. 421 point 2b of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Other than this article, the decision also violated Protocol no. 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to 2 degrees of jurisdiction in criminal matters.
9. Giurgiucanu’s case is the most comically absurd. As I said, both of our legal situations are directly linked. He was also charged with an offense that the court never ruled on, namely the use of forgery. He was, however, convicted just like me for aiding and abetting the abuse of office by using those deeds that were deemed forged – that is to say, for use of forgery, which the court did not rule on. In other words, he or least of all I could not have been convicted for aiding and abetting the abuse of office by using documents deemed as forged under the circumstances mentioned above as long as the court of first instance failed to even rule on the use of forgery. The only solution in this case was to QUASH AND REMAND FOR RETRIAL our entire case. Instead, and therein lies the comical absurdity I talked about, the judges quashed only part of the decision of the court of first instance that exclusively ruled on this offense and issued convictions for the resulting offense, namely the abuse of office. How did they charge someone with abuse of office by filing forged deeds when they did not rule on filing forged documents, i.e. the use of forgery, in the first place?
ALL the attorneys agreed on this opinion and the resulting mass conviction shocked everyone as ALL THE ATTORNEYS FAMILIAR WITH THE CASE DEEM IT AS ABUSIVE AND PROFOUNDLY UNLAWFUL.
10. In order for this decision to look more serious and include even more people, Judge Ionut Matei’s Black Panel also convicted me for being a part of an organized crime group, which is downright nonsense. Since there was no evidence for it to speak of, the court of first instance acquitted me and issued a crystal clear rationale. Also, in accordance with the EHRC decisions, this falls under the same violation of the right to a fair trial as guaranteed by art. 6, paragraph 1 in the European Convention on Human Rights.
11. The last explanation I would like to give about this case, and I hope this benefits anyone who is truly open to learning the truth, concerns Decision 148/2017 given by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest, the court of first instance. On page 184, the Court states the following: “The Court, although the proceedings to check the legal compliance of the Indictment have been closed, deems that said Indictment fails to clearly and concisely describe the offenses allegedly committed by the defendants in such a way that the Court may have an early understanding of what the charge is concretely and assess whether any motions made by the defendants and/or the prosecutor’s office to submit new evidence are founded or not – and such assessment relies on the complete understanding of the evidence with respect to the offenses that remain to be proven”.
The position of the EHRC in criminal matters is that detailed, exact and complete information regarding the charges brought against someone is an essential condition of the fairness of the proceeding, under art. 6, par. 3 in the European Convention for Human Rights. Consequently, the fact that the court of first instance only learned of this at the end of the trial has resulted not only in the violation of the right to receive complete information concerning the charges one is subject to, but also the violation of the right to two degrees of jurisdiction in criminal matters as guaranteed by art. 2 of Protocol no. 7 of the European Convention for Human Rights.
Well, then, great! The ICCJ Black Panel (composed of Ionut Matei – the Presiding Judge and head of the secret police within ICCJ, Ioana Bogdan – former advisor to the DNA Chief Prosecutor, Daniel Morar at the moment when the investigation started in this case in 2005-2008, promoted as judge at the ICCJ, what a happy coincidence – and Ioana Alina Ilie) understood the Indictment all too well, in any case better than the court of first instance and as a result dispensed a plethora of heavy convictions to everyone.
On a side note, although there are many public, written and spoken testimonies accusing him of issuing abusive decisions on command in the important cases he tried, Ionut Matei, Presiding Judge of the Black Panel has never been investigated. He was not even asked questions by judicial audit as it would normally happen in a democratic state governed by the rule of law like Romania claims to be. In any other truly democratic state with a solid justice system (not a joke, like in Romania), these extremely serious accusations would have been thoroughly investigated. Unfortunately, this situation is a reflection of the Romanian “democracy”, “justice” and “rule of law” which under the circumstances I DO NOT RECOGNIZE!
12. Finally, I was convicted for aiding and abetting the abuse of office but according to the record of the decision, as incorrect, abusive and illegal as it may be, I DO NOT OWE ANYTHING TO THE ROMANIAN STATE OR ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE. You have been duly informed, dear journalists! Please find the record as published on the ICCJ website, read it carefully and report on it accurately. I am also respectfully asking some of you to stop making up stories.

CONCLUSIONS:
1. As it should be clear from the above, I am strenuously claiming my innocence and deem the decision of conviction given in the Land Restitution Case profoundly unlawful and abusive, at least as far as I am concerned. In support of this I have succinctly, albeit not as well as a professional, provided arguments that I believe should be considered. I am certain there are other arguments that may be provided, developed and explained by attorneys. They will be used once we begin the extraordinary remedies at law and before international courts. Clearly, many other defendants in this case have their own serious arguments that support my statements herein.
2. Although for many years I have felt the incredible public pressure on this subject made worse by the inaccurate and incomplete stories in the press, a press obsessed with red hot scoops, my attorneys advised me – wrongly, I can now see – to abstain from embarking on my own truth seeking campaign. It would have been only normal, even after the suspended sentence given by court of first instance, since I believe it was wrong anyway. I stupidly continued to have faith to the bitter end in the Romanian Justice and the judges in my case and their willingness to fight for truth. This is why I have not appeared in the media until now, I have kept my silence on this topic: I have discreetly allowed my attorneys to do their job of convincing the judges of my innocence. And I have allowed the judges to do their job of ruling correctly and lawfully, in the spirit and the letter of the law, undeterred by any kind of public influence from the defendants. Up to a point, I truly believed in the good faith of these judges.
3. Despite the obvious hostility shown by the panel of judges to the defendants, because of its magnitude the conviction decision came down like a bomb and shocked everyone, starting with the defendants. It was a real knock-out! No one in his darkest nightmares expected this decision. As horrible as the abuse they suffered may be, people cannot react too strongly from behind bars. Prison is a dark place where most of them were thrown unjustly and mercilessly. They were treated hatefully, with an aggressiveness that characterizes the Romanian society – more about that in a few days. From prison you cannot have opinions, talk back, and no one takes you seriously. Also, if you say too much and make too many waves, your life may be in danger.
4. I would like to quickly say a few things: I am a person of steadfast principles and I have a strong personality. I am a fighter: I would sooner give my life than back down, especially when facing injustice. The few people who truly know me also know that these are not just words. I refused to surrender to the Romanian authorities and serve time for an unjust and undeserved punishment given by corrupt judges who are part of a corrupt system, persons without a conscience and full of hatred against innocent people. I DO NOT RECOGNIZE THE CORRUPT JUDICIARY SYSTEM OF ROMANIA! I decided to fight to the end to prove my innocence and denounce the slaves of the unhealthy justice system of Romania. I will make sure this case is not only the object of constant debate in Romania, but also a very well-known international event, in order to alert the public opinion in the civilized world to the injustice, illegalities and mistreatment perpetrated by the current justice system in Romania. I will not stop until those who are truly guilty and corrupt, those who trample underfoot the lives of innocent people pay for it. As such, the absolute priority of my life has become finding a way to solve this problem by proving the mistreatment and injustice at any cost.
5. Anyone who thinks I am in fact at the beach on an island somewhere, relaxed and even amused at the situation is dead wrong. I chose to stay away from Romania for a while, working hard and worrying every day about finding legal ways to protect myself against the effects of this judicial abjection, and figuring out strategies in the fight against this horrific neo-Communist totalitarian system. What I chose to do is not cowardly as some may be tempted to think, but in fact an act of bravery. I am lucky that there are still legal ways to solve this problem as the last thing I want is to live as a fugitive for the rest of my life – this status is only temporary. One significant action I will take is to appeal the conviction decision at the EHRC. I have no worries about my ability to prove before the EHRC the abuse, injustice and violations of my rights; I am absolutely certain that the EHRC will issue a decision against the Romanian Government which will quash the conviction decision. However, the fact that this European Court takes so long to try cases is a huge problem. In addition, no action can formally be brought at the EHRC until after the Romanian judges issue the decision rationale. I have no doubt they will take their sweet time not only due to the high complexity of the case, as I mentioned above, but also because they will be hard pressed to come up with a reasoning so quickly and give a false color of lawfulness to their abusive decision. I also have no doubt they first determined the penalties using personal, not legal criteria – and now they have to provide a rationale for them.
It doesn’t really matter whether the EHRC will eventually prove you right if in the meantime you have served your sentence. You are already a compromised person who spent many years behind bars, your public image is ruined, your spirit is broken, your health is affected, your business is gone, your family life is torn apart and your family is deeply hurt and ravaged by pain and anguish. A meager glory, apologies and a few bucks as reparation after your entire life is devastated? Thank you, but no – this is not the way! Yes, the EHRC decision will be a relevant event that will forever close the discussion on this case, but it will not happen in the next few years!
6. As soon as the conviction decision was out and particularly after the news broke that I refused to surrender to the authorities, the sensationalist media simply ganged up on me, highlighting my lifestyle in a spiteful and tendentious manner. I have the right to live my life as I choose and I do not have to answer to anyone for it. So I would like to say to all the haters who dared to talk nonsense – WATCH OUT, DEAR JOURNALISTS – that my lifestyle has always been supported FROM MY OWN FUNDS MADE LEGALLY IN MANY YEARS OF HARD WORK, COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THIS CASE. AND BY THE WAY I DID NOT MAKE ONE CENT IN THIS CASE EITHER! To support the latter statement, once again I refer you to the record of the conviction decision available on the ICCJ website which did not sentence me to pay anything to the government or any other person, except for the legal fees of 30,000 Lei. I suspect this will clearly convince anyone that my statement above is exact and that the stories some of you published were false.
7. I am extremely disappointed with the behavior of the media when they found out that I refused to surrender to the Romanian authorities to serve an unjust sentence given at the end of an abusive and illegal trial. The media viciously skewered me incessantly for an entire week, throwing around outrageous accusations and inaccuracies – I will make some additional clarifications on this topic in a few days. Nevertheless, I maintain a healthy dose of optimism despite the obvious rule of a corrupt justice system in Romania. My optimism is justified by the existence of a few people with a conscience and principles in the Romanian justice system. There are some left even at the High Court of Cassation and Justice. I am optimistically relying on fair judges who have not been recruited by this odious system, on changes to the legislation meant to correct the misuse of justice, on the political forces and the media fighting this scourge, and on the public that looks out for real justice.
8. These were a few of the things I needed to say to the public and the people who know me personally. In my current situation, this is the only means of communication I can afford. I wanted to proudly make these things clear given the harm that this conviction and my refusal to serve an unjust sentence have inflicted on my image. A part of the Romanian media has contributed to the detriment brought to my image as they talked about me in my absence in a biased and spiteful way. Finally, I wanted to clarify my position in this matter. In the next few days I will address some false, biased and spiteful information shamelessly purported by some Romanian media outlets.

(Pentru cine poate si chiar vrea sa inteleaga)

          1. Dosarul Retrocedarilor a inceput acum exact 14 ani, in 2005, cand un inamic al primarului de atunci Radu Mazare, pe nume Constantin Cucoara – fostul sef al Cadastrului Constanta, proaspat angajat la DNA, a facut o plangere penala, probabil ca prima indatorire de serviciu. Fiind vorba de un fas evident, fara nicio baza reala, dupa ce un dosar s-a constituit, politistii si procurorii, dupa cercetari, au dispus neinceperea urmaririi penale (NUP) si clasarea dosarului. Dupa ce procurorul Tulus a fost numit ca procuror-sef, exact a doua zi a ordonat recercetarea in dosar, redistribuind dosarul altor politisti si procurori din DNA, cu ordin direct de a gasi ceva pentru a-l infunda pe Mazare, principalul om care ii voia capul fiind presedintele de atunci, Traian Basescu. Procurorii au trimis controale la Primaria Constanta iar oamenii DNA-ului au plecat de acolo cu 2 camioane de hartii pantru a cerceta si a gasi ceva, absolut orice! Foarte bine, nimic rau in asta! Numai ca tot ei se plangeau ca nu au gasit mai nimic iar ordinul era foarte clar! In final, dupa 3 ani de cercetari, au constituit dosarul , au scris un Rechizitoriu absolut ridicol, de care toti avocatii din dosar radeau literalmente si au trims dosarul in judecata. Dosarul a fost constituit in principal pe 2 acuzatii :

Prima, ca s-a produs un prejudiciu urias, calculat in baza unui raport de constatare de catre specialistii DNA – 2 specialisti dintre care unul, un batranel,  nu facea decat calcule matematice ,nestiind sa faca altceva in calitatea lui de “specialist” – dupa cum a si declarat in instanta – si al doilea – cine credeti?? – noul angajat al DNA – Constantin Cucoara, exact cel ce a depus si plangerea penala! Un singur detaliu de subliniat – niciunul nu avea atestat de expert autorizat si deci, niciunul nu avea calitatea legala de a aprecia preturile terenurilor si in consecinta sa poata veni cu o opinie obiectiva raportat la potentialul prejudiciu! Ei bine, in baza calculului acestor “specialisti” si nu experti, DNA a facut public celebrul Rechizitoriu in care au apreciat ei dupa caputul lor niste prejudicii astronomice, la care jurnalistii si publicul in general pur si simplu au explodat! Rezultatul? Inca de acum 11 ani, de cand tot scriu de acest dosar, jurnalistii au tot amintit ultrainsistent de respectivul prejudiciu, comunicat initial de DNA -si anume – 114 milioane de Euro!!! Sigur, suma in sine e oricum o suma foarte mare, dar suprafata de teren la care se raporta aceasta suma este uriasa, de ordinul milioanelor de metri patrati de teren, Dosarul Retrocedarilor fiind compus de fapt din 6 dosare uriase, absolut distincte, cu cele mai mari suprafete revendicate si restituite din Constanta! Din aceasta perspectiva, raportat la suprafata de teren pe care s-au reconstituit drepturi de proprietate, prejudiciul in sine nu mai este atat de spectaculos! Sigur, nimeni nu s-a ostenit sa puncteze aceste detalii, toata lumea s-a raportat numai la cifra in sine!

A doua acuzatie de baza se referea la faptul ca Primaria a restituit revendicatorilor intinse suprafete din domeniul public, fapt interzis de lege!

Dar sa spunem ca totul ok pana aici. Ce nu e ok absolut deloc este ca, expertizele – cadastrala si evaluatoare – dispuse in dosar de catre instanta de fond – Curtea de Apel Bucuresti – si efectuate de catre experti autorizati, nu “specialisti”, – au aratat foarte clar 2 lucruri:

                             1.  Prejudiciul din dosar, referitor la aceste diferente de preturi, NU EXISTA!! ESTE 0!!!

                             2. Nu s-a retrocedat NICI MACAR UN CENTIMETRU din Domeniul Public!!!

•               Ati citit asta, domnilor jurnalisti???? Ati avut macar curiozitatea sa va uitati in dosar sau sa vorbiti cu avocatii, cei care v-ar fi putut oferi oricand aceste detalii?? Daca nu, cum ramane cu profesionalismul dvs referitor la relatarea exacta a realitatii??? Iar daca da, cum ramane cu conduita dumneavoastra, a celor care ati tot relatat in legatura cu acest dosar?? Si pun aceste intrebari (sigur, retorice) pentru simplul fapt ca, in mod absolut continuu si constant, orice relatare a presei raportat la acest dosar nu amintea decat de comunicatul initial al procurorilor, luat absolut copy-paste, fara urma de intrebuintare din partea dvs in sensul aflarii si relatarii Adevarului, NICIUNUL dintre dvs. neamintind de expertiza oficiala dispusa si efectuata in dosar, care contrazice TOTAL comunicatul initial al DNA pe care cu totii l-ati tot citat in fiecare stire referitoare la acest dosar! 
• Din cauza nerelatarii corecte a realitatii din acest dosar, informatiile din presa fiind doar de genul super-pompos si intotdeauna amintindu-se numai de cifra-prejudiciu INVENTATA de “specialistii” DNA, opinia publica a parut foarte surprinsa cand, la instanta de fond – Curtea de Apel Bucuresti, sentinta data (oricum, in ciuda presiunilor media si a Serviciilor – mult mai aproape de realitate si adevar) a  parut excesiv de blanda! – (9 condamnari cu suspendare si 25 de achitari, nicio condamnare cu executare )-  raportat la bazaconiile scrise in presa preluate subiectiv numai din Rechizitoriul DNA, niciun jurnalist neamintind de ce spunea expertiza din dosar referitor la LIPSA unui prejudiciu real!! Sigur, ei doar cautau senzationalul, nu erau interesati de realitate si de adevar!!!

•   Ce s-a intamplat in consecinta ulterior, la ICCJ – reduta Serviciilor  (asa cum in mod evident s-a demonstrat in ultima perioada, inclusiv in urma scandalului declasificarii Protocoalelor – declarate oricum ilegale de CCR)?? Simplu. Pe fondul acestei isterii legate de amploarea dosarului si amploarea asa-zisului prejudiciu, avand in vedere persoanele cunoscute din dosar, unele dintre acestea avand alte probleme de ordin penal si “bucurandu-se” de o mare antipatie publica ( Mazare, Constantinescu, Borcea) si totodata pe fondul unei nevoi acute de o revenire in prim-plan a DNA-ului ca “inger pazitor” al justitiei romane, avand o extrema nevoie acuta de refacere a imaginii datorita demascarii constante a gravelor abuzuri pe care le-a facut, abuzuri dovedite extrem de clar in special in ultima perioada, iata ca dosarul a fost distribuit “aleator” la celebrul Complet Negru prezidat de si mai celebrul domn judecator Ionut Matei!! De la inceput a fost evident pentru toata lumea ca toti cei din dosar au o extrem de mare problema, pentru ca solutia va fi cea de condamnare cu executare pentru majoritatea, indiferent de situatia juridica reala din dosar, indiferent de argumentele apararii, indiferent de vinovatie sau nevinovatie!!! Totul a devenit mai mult decat evident cand, la prima sa intrare in complet ca presedinte (acest lucru intamplandu-se la al 2-lea termen de judecata, pentru ca la primul termen a fost ocupat cu Referendumul si a fost substituit de un alt judecator), judecatorul Ionut Matei a impus deja avocatilor ca la urmatoarele 2 termene, date in cascada, in 2 zile consecutive, sa puna deja concluzii pe fond si sa finalizeze dosarul, in conditiile in care discutam – asa cum am mentionat anterior – de un dosar-mamut, de 90 de volume, cu 36 de inculpati, constituit din 6 dosare uriase complet separate adunate toate in unul!!! In mod realist, judecatorii nici macar nu aveau timp sa citeasca macar sumar dosarul atat de rapid!! Bineinteles ca judecatorii, in sedintele de cate 10 ore zilnice ce au urmat, total neobisnuit si fatis ultragrabit,  au respins pe banda cele peste 20 de exceptii de neconstitutionalitate si cereri absolut obiective depuse de catre avocati!! A existat chiar un moment hilar cand judecatorii au uitat sa retina spre citire una din exceptiile depuse de unul dintre avocati, respingand cererea fara ca macar formal sa o citeasca!!! 
• Evident ca judecatorii din complet au speculat la maxim situatia produsa de faptul ca Mazare avea multe alte dosare si mai era si fugit din tara, Borcea si Constantinescu au mai fost condamnati – si deci credibilitatea lor era absolut redusa, iar Rechizitoriul – cu uriasul prejudiciu continuu si obsesiv amintit de presa in fiecare stire, din motivele aratate mai sus, – suna absolut fulminant!!! Rezultatul a fost o EXECUTIE, aruncand aproape necontrolat cu pedepse la toata lumea, absolut toti din dosar fiind condamnati la ani grei de inchisoare!!!

          2. Presedintele Inaltei Curti a format ILEGAL completele de 3 judecatori, in plus a repartizat NEALEATOR , in mod evident CU DEDICATIE dosarul si iata rezultatul concret, acest complet ce ne-a judecat a condus la aceasta EXECUTIE! Ca o paranteza – chiar isi inchipuie cineva ca repartizarea dosarului la exact acest celebru complet de judecata este intamplatoare??? – haideti sa fim seriosi!! Iar daca repartizarea nu este intamplatoare – si in mod evident, nu este! – atunci care ar fi putut fi motivul acestei repartizari a dosarului?? In mod evident, exact EXECUTIA ce a urmat!!  Sanctiunea legala a acestei formari nelegale a Completului este, conform legii, nulitatea absoluta a hotararii pronuntate! Categoric, toata discutia referitoare la constituirea completelor de judecata de 5 judecatori DAR SI DE 3 JUDECATORI face cel mai mare sens si va trebui rezolvata de catre Executiv sau Parlament, conform deciziilor Curtii Constitutionale! O spun din postura celui care cu adevarat a simtit pe piele proprie aceasta ilegalitate si mai ales acest abuz!

          3. Unul dintre condamnatii din dosar, Giurgiucanu Georgica, pe buna dreptate, a descoperit un fals produs la nivelul conducerii Inaltei Curti, despre care presa a tot scris, in legatura cu Hotararea 80/2017 prin care s-au numit completele de judecata pe anul 2018! Aceasta Hotarare 80/2017 NU EXISTA, asa cum nu exista nici procesul verbal anexa acestei Hotarari a Colegilui Director al Inaltei Curti. Giurgiucanu si-a permis chiar sa sesizeze Inspectia Judiciara si sa faca plangere la CSM in acest sens, dublate si de o plangere penala! Decizie iata, destul de neinspirata! Sigur, total intamplator, la nici doua luni mai tarziu, e condamnat la 5 ani si 6 luni cu executare!! Din pacate pentru mine, eram in acelasi contract cu el , legat practic ombilical ca si situatie juridica si am primit aceeasi condamnare.

          4. Intreaga speta Movila, pentru care am fost condamnat, si care reprezinta doar unul din cele 6 dosare principale amintite mai sus,  se bazeaza pe un singur lucru: – pretinsa ilegalitate a unui contract de cesiune de drepturi litigioase facut – zic procurorii – cu depasirea limitelor legale ale contractului de mandat in baza caruia a fost semnat, acum 17 ani  -in anul 2002!!,  in conditiile in care exista 4 hotarari judecatoresti ale instantei civile care atesta dreptul real al revendicatorilor in aceasta speta, depuse la dosarul cauzei de la ICCJ ca probe la penultimul termen de judecata! Daca procurorii cand au facut dosarul, nu le aveau, ca si instanta de la fondul cauzei – Curtea de Apel Bucuresti -, in schimb judecatorii din Completul Negru, servili sistemului,  pur si simplu nu au tinut cont de ele!!! In plus, chiar si in conditiile in care contractul de cesiune ar fi fost semnat cu depasirea limitelor mandatului, speta este pur civila si nu impune trimiterea oamenilor la inchisoare ci, cel mult, desfiinatrea contractelor respective si a actelor ulterioare! Mai mult decat atat, in conditiile in care titlurile de proprietate s-au eliberat in baza Legii 10, in aceasta Lege 10, Lege Speciala, exista la art.36 foarte clar explicat care sunt consecintele penale ale incalcarii acestei legi in procesul revendicarii in sensul depunerii de documente false sau in sensul in care se pretinde existenta dreptului revendicatorului fara insa a fi legal. Aceasta pedeapsa insa s-a prescris de multi ani iar articolul respectiv a fost chiar abrogat in 2014, deci azi, cum e firesc, aceasta teoretica fapta nici nu mai are consecinte penale!!! Ei bine, judecatorii au interpretat aberant si abuziv aceasta fapta ca fiind complicitate la abuz in serviciu si au aruncat, dupa 17 ani de la pretinsa comitere a ei, cu ani multi de inchisoare!!!

          5. In ceea ce ma priveste, in afara de faptul ca in speta mea nimeni nu intelege care este si in ce consta abuzul in serviciu facut de functionarii Primariei Constanta, am fost acuzat de complicitate la abuz in serviciu fara a face literalmente nimic!!! Singurul lucru pe care l-am facut a fost sa dau o procura unei persoane – Giurgiucanu Georgica – de a se ocupa de formalitatile legale privind revendicarea in baza legii! Asta e tot, asta e marea mea crima!!! In rest, nu am depus niciun act, nu am facut nicio cerere, nu am ridicat niciun document, nu am semnat nimic!!! Evident, nu am vorbit cu nimeni! Nu exista niciun fel de proba in dovedirea niciunei acuzatii!!! Absolut halucinant!!

          6. La instanta de fond , Curtea de Apel Bucuresti, pedeapsa mea a fost de 3 ani cu suspendare, iar renumitul Complet negru de la  ICCJ prezidat de judecatorul Ionut Matei – seful structurii de securitate din ICCJ- a aplicat dublul pedepsei dispuse de instanta de fond – 5 ani si 6 luni cu executare, FARA A ADMINISTRA PROBE NOI!! Conform opiniei CEDO si jurisprudentei acestei instante, o asemenea situatie reprezinta o incalcare a dreptului la un proces echitabil, garantat de art.6 paragraful 1 din Conventia Europeana a Drepturilor Omului!!! Vorbesc acum exclusiv de problema condamnarii mele personale, dar doar in treacat vreau sa aduc vorbire de faptul ca 25 de inculpati au fost achitati la instanta de fond iar acest complet dejudecatori corupti de sistemul din care fac parte, i-a condamnat la ani grei de inchisoare cu executare fara a exista probe noi, ci doar reinterpretand aberant asa-zisele probe existente la dosar!!!

          7. Considerand prin absurd ca faptele de care am fost acuzat si pentru care am fost condamnat chiar exista si ar fi fost savarsite de mine, raportat la intervalul de timp in care aceste presupuse infractiuni au fost savarsite, instanta de apel – respectiv Completul Negru de la ICCJ care m-a judecat – ar fi trebuit sa dispuna aplicarea unei pedepse orientate catre minimul special prevazut de lege, iar in ceea ce priveste modalitatea de executare – suspendarea executarii pedepsei sub supraveghere – o alta norma consacrata de practica Curtii Europene a Drepturilor Omului. La data savarsirii pretinsei infractiuni aveam varsta de 28 de ani, acum am 45. Discutam de o pretinsa fapta de acum 17 ani!!!! Avand in vedere aceste aspecte, avocatii mi-au explicat ca aceasta condamnare data in aceste conditii incalca principiul oportunitatii procesului penal, degajat de jurisprudenta CEDO.

          8.    – Asa cum am aratat, am fost condamnat pentru complicitate la abuz in serviciu cu functionarii publici la fond, la 3 ani cu suspendare, insa judecatorul nu a motivat in niciun fel sentinta si in consecinta nu m-am putut apara!Singura propozitie ca motivare s-a referit la ideea ca s-a folosit un contract de cesiune considerat fals intelectual de catre instanta pe motivul ca a fost semnat in baza unui contract de mandat ale carui limite s-au depasit, asa cum am aratat mai sus, iar acest contract a fost folosit de mine (nici macar nu este asa, pentru ca eu doar am dat o procura de reprezentare, atat!!) si asta a dus la eliberare de titluri ilegale de proprietate. Mai mult decat atat, in ceea ce priveste nemotivarea descrisa mai sus, acesta este un motiv de netrecut pentru o casare cu trimitere spre rejudecare!! In plus, a existat o infractiune de care am fost acuzat si asupra careia instanta de fond NU S-A PRONUNTAT absolut deloc!  In aceasta situatie, aceasta decizie de condamnare data de Completul Negru al ICCJ, cel putin in cazul meu, incalca flagrant OBLIGATIA instantei de a desfiinta hotararea si a dispune rejudecarea de catre instanta de fond, prevazuta de art. 421 pct. 2 lit. b Din Codul de Procedura Penala!!! Pe langa articolul mentionat mai sus, s-a incalcat flagrant si Protocolul nr. 7 la Conventia Europeana pentru Drepturile Omului referitor la dreptul de 2 grade de jurisdictie in materie penala!

            9. Hilarul situatiei vine insa din speta lui Giurgiucanu, de care cum am spus sunt legat ombilical ca situatie juridica, care a avut de asemenea o infractiune pentru care instanta de fond nu s-a pronuntat, infractiunea de uz de fals. In schimb, a fost condamnat pentru aceeasi complicitate la abuz in serviciu pe acelasi motiv ca a folosit acele acte considerate false, deci uzul de fals – infractiunea pe care instanta de fond nu s-a pronuntat!!! Cu alte cuvinte, nu putea fi condamnat, nici el si cu atat mai putin eu, pe infractiunea de complicitate la abuz in serviciu, pe motivul ca ar fi folosit acte considerate false, in conditiile aratate mai sus, atata timp cat pe infractiunea de uz de fals instanta de fond nu s-a pronuntat!!! Singura solutie in aceasta situatie era CASAREA CU TRIMITERE SPRE REJUDECARE a intregii noastre spete!!! In mod hilar cum am spus, judecatorii au casat cu trimitere spre rejudecare doar parte a sentintei de fond ce se refera exclusiv la aceasta infractiune si au condamnat pentru infractiunea-rezultat de abuz in serviciu!! Pai cum sa il acuzi ca a facut abuz in serviciu depunand acte false cand nu ai pronuntare pe infractiunea de depunere a actelor false, deci pe uzul de fals??

 TOTI avocatii au avut aceasta opinie, iar condamnarea in masa survenita a socat pe toata lumea pentru ca ABSOLUT TOTI AVOCATII CARE CUNOSC DOSARUL O CONSIDERA ABUZIVA SI PROFUND NELEGALA!!!!

             10. Ca sa nu fie extrem de subtire aceasta condamnare si ca sa poata ingloba cat mai multe persoane, am fost condamnat de asemena de catre Completul Negru, condus de judecatorul Ionut Matei si pentru infractiunea de apartenenta la grup infractional organizat.(???) O extrem de mare aberatie, FARA NICIO PROBA, infractiune pentru care am fost achitat la instanta de fond cu o extrem de clara motivare. In plus, conform deciziilor CEDO – e vorba de aceeasi incalcare a dreptului la un proces echitabil, garantat de art.6 paragraful 1 din Conventia Europeana a Drepturilor Omului!

  

             11. Ultima mentiune pe care vreau sa o fac in sensul explicarii cazului de fata – sper pe intelesul oricarei persoane cu adevarat interesata de ADEVAR – , se refera la faptul ca in Hotararea 148/2017 a instantei de fond – Curtea de Apel Bucuresti – , Instanta face la pag. 184 urmatoarea asertiune: “Curtea, desi s-a depasit momentul procesual al verificarii legalitatii rechizitoriului, apreciaza ca rechizitoriul nu descrie intr-o maniera clara inteligibila si concisa faptele pe care se presupune ca inculpatii le-au savarsit, astfel incat instanta de judecata sa inteleaga de la inceput in ce consta concret, punctual, invinuirea adusa, totodata sa poata aprecia daca eventuale cereri formulate de inculpati si/sau parchet pentru administrarea unor noi probe sunt sau nu intemeiate (evaluare care presupune o intelegere deplina a obiectului probatiunii in raport de faptele ce tin a se dovedi)”

CEDO considera ca, in materie penala, o informare detaliata, precisa si completa cu privire la acuzatiile formulate contra unei persoane este o conditie esentiala a echitatii procedurii, prevazuta de art.6 paragraful 3 din Conventia Europeana a Drepturilor Omului. In consecinta, faptul ca Instanta de fond a constatat acest aspect abia la terminarea judecatii are ca efect, pe langa incalcarea dreptului de a fi informat in mod complet asupra acuzatiilor aduse, si incalcarea dreptului la doua grade de jurisdictie in materie penala, garantata de art.2 din Protocolul nr. 7 la Conventia Europeana a Drepturilor Omului.

                Ei bine, nicio problema, Completul Negru de la ICCJ (format din Ionut Matei – presedintele Completului si seful securistilor din ICCJ, Ioana Bogdan – fostul consilier al sefului DNA Daniel Morar de la momentul constituirii dosarului, anii 2005-2008!!! – ce coincidenta fericita!!! – promovata direct judecator la ICCJ !!–  si Ioana Alina Ilie) a inteles foarte bine Rechizitoriul, in orice caz mult mai bine decat instanta de fond si in consecinta a aruncat cu condamnari grele, administrate pe banda, tuturor!!!

                Ca o paranteza, domnul judecator Ionut Matei, presedinte al Completului Negru ce a judecat dosarul, desi exista multe marturii spuse si scrise negru pe alb PUBLIC in legatura cu implicarea acestuia in solutionarea abuziva si la ordin a dosarelor importante pe care le judeca, nu a fost anchetat niciodata, in niciun fel!!!  Nici macar nu a fost intrebat de catre o structura de control judiciar, cum ar fi normal sa se intample intr-un stat de drept democratic asa cum se pretinde a fi  Statul Roman!! Daca acest lucru s-ar fi intamplat in orice fel de stat cu adevarat democratic si cu justitie reala (nu parodie, ca in Romania!!), aceste acuzatii extrem de serioase ar fi fost investigate la sange!!  Din pacate pentru tara noastra, aceasta situatie este expresia “democratiei” , “justitiei” si a “Statului de Drept” din Romania, pe care, in conditiile date, dati-mi voie sa NU LE RECUNOSC!!!

               12. In final, am primit o condamnare pentru complicitate la abuz in serviciu dar, conform minutei acestei sentinte, – asa incorecta, abuziva si ilegala cum este ea -, NU DATOREZ STATULUI ROMAN SI NIMANUI NICIUN BAN, PENTRU CA NU AM PRODUS NICIUN PREJUDICIU!!! Aviz amatorilor, domnilor jurnalisti!!! Va rog respectuos sa cititi atent minuta, pe care o gasiti publicata pe site-ul ICCJ si in consecinta, sa relatati in mod corect! Pe unii dintre dumneavoastra va rog respectuos, de asemenea,  sa nu mai fabulatii!

                                                                                                                CONCLUZII:

                     1. Dupa cum se poate vedea mai sus, imi sustin total nevinovatia si consider ca sentinta de condamnare data, cel putin in cazul meu, in Dosarul retrocedarilor  este profund nelegala si abuziva! In acest sens am adus succint, desigur nu la un nivel profesional, niste argumente in acest sens  – cred eu – demne de luat in seama! Acestea sunt doar cateva, sigur ca exista si alte argumente in acest sens ce vor fi explicate si completate profesional de catre avocati! Acestea vor fi folosite insa odata cu demararea cailor extraordinare de atac, ca si in fata altor instante internationale. In mod evident, multi alti inculpati au, la randul lor, serioase argumente de sustinere a afirmatiilor mele!

                    2.  In ciuda faptului ca de multi ani de zile am tot vazut si simtit presiunea publica incredibila pe acest subiect data de relatarile inexacte si incomplete ale presei din Romania dornice de SENZATIONAL, am fost sfatuit de catre avocati – in mod evident gresit!!! – sa nu pornesc o ofensiva in presa care sa contribuie la aflarea adevarului, cum este normal, chiar si dupa sentinta de condamnare cu suspendare de la instanta de fond, – cu care oricum nu am fost de acord considerand-o incorecta -, avand prosteste incredere pana la final in Justitia Romana si in judecatorii care m-au judecat , ca si in contributia acestora la aflarea adevarului!! Este motivul pentru care nu am iesit in presa pana acum, nu am spus nimic despre acest subiect,  incercand ca in mod discret, corect si profesional sa las avocatii sa isi faca treaba si sa convinga judecatorii de evidenta nevinovatiei mele, sa ii las si pe acestia sa isi faca treaba si sa judece corect si legal, in spiritul si litera legii, neafectati de niciun fel de presiune publica din partea inculpatilor,  judecatori pe care pana la un anumit moment i-am considerat de buna-credinta.

                    3. In ciuda ostlilitatii evidente a Completului de judecata raportat la inculpati, condamnarea survenita la aceasta dimensiune a venit ca o bomba, socand practic pe toata lumea, in primul rand pe inculpati! A fost ca un knock-out! Realmente nimeni, nici in visele cele mai groaznice nu se astepta la o asemenea sentinta! In ciuda abuzurilor groaznice suferite, reactiile acestora nu pot insa aparea puternic si ferm in momentul in care se afla in inchisoare!! Este un loc sumbru in care marea lor majoritate au fost aruncati pe nedrept, fara mila, chiar cu ura data si de agresivitatea ce vine direct din societatea romaneasca, despre care o sa scriu in cateva zile. Din acel loc nu prea poti sa emiti opinii, nu te poti exprima, si nici nu prea te ia nimeni in seama. In plus, daca spui prea multe si deranjezi prea mult, viata iti poate fi pusa in pericol!

                    4.  In ceea ce ma priveste, vreau sa spun succint cateva lucruri : Sunt o persoana extrem de principiala si cu o extrem de mare tarie de caracter. Sunt un luptator, mai degraba imi dau viata decat sa cedez, in special in fata nedreptatii!! Putinii oameni care ma cunosc cu adevarat stiu bine ca astea nu sunt vorbe goale! Am ales sa nu ma predau autoritatilor romane pentru a-mi ispasi o pedeapsa nedreapta si nemeritata data de niste judecatori corupti de sistemul din care fac parte, fara constiinta si plini de ura la adresa unor oameni nevinovati!!  NU RECUNOSC SISTEMUL DE JUSTITIE  CORUPT DIN ROMANIA!!! Am decis sa lupt pana la capat  pentru a-mi demonstra nevinovatia si pentru a-i demasca pe oamenii servili unui sistem de justitie bolnav din Romania! Voi face din acest caz nu numai un caz super-dezbatut la nivel national ci si un caz cunoscut international, pentru a atrage atentia opiniei publice din tarile civilizate asupra nedreptatilor, ilegalitatilor si abuzurilor pe care actualul sistem de justitie din Romania le face! Nu ma voi opri pana la momentul in care cei care sunt cu adevarat vinovati si corupti si care isi bat joc de vietile oamenilor nevinovati vor plati!!!In aceste conditii, prioritatea principala a vietii mele a devenit rezolvarea acestei probleme si demonstrarea abuzurilor si nedreptatilor, cu absolut orice pret!!!

                     5. Daca cineva isi inchipuie ca in realitate eu sunt probabil undeva la soare pe vreo o insula, stand relaxat si eventual amuzat de situatie, se inseala amarnic!!! Am ales sa stau un timp departe de Romania, chinuindu-ma, muncind si stresandu-ma zilnic pentru a gasi solutii legale de a ma salva de efectele acestei mizerii judiciare si de a ma organiza in ceea ce priveste lupta cu acest groaznic sistem tortionar neocomunist!! Ceea ce am ales sa fac nu este nicidecum un act de lasitate cum unii ar putea considera, ci un act de curaj. Norocul meu este ca inca exista solutii legale de rezolvare a acestei probleme, pentru ca in niciun caz nu doresc sa imi traiesc viata ca un fugar, aceasta fiind doar o situatie de moment!! O masura importanta pe care o voi lua va fi categoric atacarea la CEDO a sentintei de condamnare!! Chiar daca insa nu am niciun dubiu in legatura cu demonstrarea la CEDO a abuzurilor, nedreptatilor si incalcarii drepturilor mele legale, desi sunt sigur in proportie maxima de obtinerea unei Hotarari de condamnare a Statului roman si de anulare a sentintei de condamnare,  timpul extrem de indelungat alocat de forul european pana la o judecare a dosarului constituie o problema mare! In plus, formalitatile nu permit inregistrarea unei actiuni in instanta la Curtea Europeana decat abia dupa motivarea sentintei date. Nu am niciun dubiu ca judecatorii nu se vor grabi cu motivarea sentintei, nu numai datorita complexitatii dosarului, asa cum am mentionat mai sus, dar si pentru faptul ca le va fi destul de greu totusi sa motiveze rapid si sa dea o aparenta de legalitate acestei solutii abuzive!!! La fel, nu am niciun dubiu ca mai intai au fixat pedepsele dupa propriile criterii si nu cele legale, iar acum se vor chinui sa le motiveze!

                    In situatia in care intre timp iti exerciti pedeapsa data, nu mai are nicio importanata ca dupa ani si ani CEDO iti va da dreptate!!! Esti deja o persoana compromisa, care a executat deja multi ani de inchisoare, imaginea iti este distrusa, mentalul este la pamant, sanatatea afectata, afacerile nu mai exista, viata familiala este extrem de grav afectata sau chiar distrusa, familia este absolut lovita, imbolnavita, distrusa de suferinta!!! Ce iti mai ofera atunci CEDO dupa chiar sa zicem constatarea nevinovatiei tale??? Lauri, scuze si 3 lei despagubiri dupa ce intreaga viata ti-a fost afectata grav???? Multumesc frumos, dar nu asta este solutia!!!! Solutia CEDO va fi insa o chestiune reala care va inchide oricum definitiv problema, dar vazuta in perspectiva catorva ani de acum incolo!

                        6. Imediat dupa aflarea sentintei de condamnare si mai ales dupa ce s-a aflat ca nu m-am predat  autoritatilor, o parte a presei amatoare de senzational, pur si simplu a sarit pe mine cu picioarele, punand puternic accent intr-un mod tendentios si malitos, pe modul meu de viata. In ciuda faptului ca e absolut dreptul si alegerea mea asupra modului meu de viata, pentru care nu datorez nimanui, – niciunui hater –  nicio explicatie, vreau sa atrag atentia public acestor persoane ce si-au permis sa sustina mari aberatii,  deci – MARE ATENTIE, DOMNILOR SI DOAMNELOR JURNALISTI – ca acest mod de viata a fost sustinut intotdeauna din DIN BANI PROPRII FACUTI LEGAL, IN ANI SI ANI DE MUNCA,  CARE NU AU NICIO LEGATURA CU ACEST DOSAR, DIN CARE EU NU AM CASTIGAT NICIUN CENT!!!  In sprijinul acestei ultime afirmatii, va invit din nou sa cititi minuta sentintei de condamnare la care am facut referire mai sus, publicata pe site-ul ICCJ si sa constatati ca, cu exceptia unei taxe judiciare de 30.000 lei, nu am fost obligat la plata niciunui cent catre stat sau vreo alta persoana!! Banuiesc ca acest lucru va va convinge foarte clar de afirmatia mea de mai sus si evident de falsitatea informatiilor publicate de unii dintre dvs.

                        7. In ciuda faptului ca sunt extrem de dezamagit de reactiile unei parti a presei referitoare la refuzul meu de a ma preda autoritatilor romane in vederea ispasirii pedepsei nemeritate survenita in urma unui mod abuziv si ilegal de a judeca, in ciuda faptului ca aceeasi presa m-a atacat furibund non-stop pret de o saptamana aruncand cu acuzatii si neadevaruri care mai de care mai ridicole (o sa revin in cateva zile si o sa clarific si acele aspecte), in ciuda existentei evidente a sistemului corupt de justitie din Romania, imi pastrez inca o doza de optimism!! Aceasta doza de optimism se indreapta catre acei oameni cu constiinta si principii care exista totusi in justitia romana, inclusiv desigur la Inalta Curte!! Doza mea de optimism se indreapta catre judecatorii corecti neracolati de acest sistem odios, catre firavele inca masuri politice luate in sensul corectarii abuzurilor din justitie, catre modificarile legislative destinate sa corecteze aceste abuzuri, catre fortele politice si media care se lupta cu acest flagel, dar si catre publicul cu constiinta iubitor de dreptate!

                          8. Acestea ar fi cateva lucruri pe care am simtit ca trebuie sa le adresez opiniei publice ca si persoanelor care ma cunosc personal. Intr-o situatie ca a mea, la momentul dat, aceasta ar fi singura cale de comunicare. Am tinut sa fac aceste precizari, cu demnitate, ca urmare a puternicei lovituri de imagine pe care am primit-o in urma acestei condamnari, dar si in urma refuzului meu de a ma preda autoritatilor romane in vedera ispasirii unei pedepse nemeritate! La lovitura de imagine mentionata a contribuit decisiv si o parte a presei din Romania, prin modul tendentios si subiectiv de prezentare si comentare a persoanei mele in lipsa mea si a reactiilor mele. Am tinut totodata sa precizez care este pozitia mea fata de aceasta situatie. In urmatoarele zile voi reveni cu precizari raportat la anumite informatii false, tendentios si malitios prezentate de o parte a presei din Romania, spre necinstea ei.

                            

People are unduly greedy, related to how much they need, in material terms, for themselves and for their families and for all their close ones. Almost all the time they miscalculate and they do not size correctly their material needs. And especially to the their limited life in time. They are blinded in their rush after material things. They do not realize how unimportant they are and mostly they do not realize they can pass away at all tides. Very few understand that, in this regard, they should either leave something important behind them – from a material perspective – or to evolve as much as they can and to and raise their spiritual level – of course, from a spiritual perspective.

In their vast majority, people are living in a tight material circle, without seeing almost anything beyond it. And they do not even look outside, because they do not even suspect that there would be something out there  …

People do not have enough time to understand the meaning of life. Very few, those a bit more intelligent or enlightened come to perceive correctly the principles of life from an early age. The others understand these things too late, after they made many mistakes and have severely damaged a lot around them, oftentimes their own life or even their own soul. And the most never understand.
But even without something irreversible happening to them, by understanding it too late they have so little time to evolve … And they do not get to do it, they are already too old and they die. And spiritual evolution does not occur.
People do not realize that their whole existence may become important to them or to the others only if a determinant spiritual evoluation occurs.

Just some after-midnight thoughts… ;)

People, in general, perceive happiness after they achieve some material things, or when they have certain psychological, emotional or physical satisfaction, caused mainly by the release of endorphins. Starting from the obvious idea that happiness is a state generated by our own mind,  own brain through own sensations and feelings, then any man may be able to achieve happiness through the exercise of the mind, from the inside. Consequently, at least in theory, the human mind is able to set itself on the mode of living at a very high level of feeling, compatible with the condition that we call ‘happiness’. We are able to be happy and to perceive happiness focusing only on this idea, practicing, by self-suggestion, playing all the information, without actually depending on anything from the outside.

It seems that in order to achieve happiness, the most important thing is training our mind in this regard.

Oamenii in general percep starea de fericire dupa ce au realizat anumite lucruri materiale, sau atunci cand simt anumite satisfactii psihologice, sentimentale sau chiar fizice, determinate in principal de eliberarea de endorfine. Pornind de la ideea evidenta ca starea de fericire este o stare generata de fapt de propria minte, de propriul creier prin propriile senzatii si trairi, atunci orice om poate fi capabil sa atinga starea de fericire prin exercitiul mintii, din interior. In consecinta, la modul cel putin teoretic, mintea umana este capabila sa se seteze singura pe modul de traire la un nivel al simtirii foarte ridicat, compatibil cu starea pe care noi o numim ‘fericire’. Suntem in stare de a fi fericiti si de a percepe starea de fericire focusandu-ne doar pe aceasta idee, exersand, autosugestionandu-ne, interpretand toate informatiile, fara a depinde de fapt de absolut nimic din exterior.

Pare ca pentru a atinge starea de fericire cel mai important lucru este de fapt antrenarea mintii in acest sens.

There are persons I care a lot for. I respect and I appreciate all of them. Each of them has a special place somewhere in my heart. In reality, categorically, each had his important role in everything I am today, as a person. On the other hand, there are two aspects these dear persons seem to forget. The first is that in most cases my healthy and defining influence on them was at least on a par with theirs on me. The second refers to the reality that after the break up with each of them, I still continued my ascent. Much stronger. And I have never stopped for a moment, nor I will stop. Probably enough others will follow in my life, pretending the same thing… :)

Why is it so important? Because it changes your life, your existence and sets you free. By eliminating the frustrations you smooth the path to peace, fulfilment and hapiness. The elimination of frustrations brings the sense of complete fulfilment. Life will seem to have a different taste, will make sense, everything will become more simple, more clear, more beautiful. Malice will diminish or it will even disappear, taking a big load off your chest. Noble feelings towards people and everything around you will appear. By eliminating the frustrations you become pleased with your life, with your place, with your destiny. The desire for evolution will then come naturally, with no fierceness, as a native call of your human nature. And that evolution you wish for will really happen.

It’s not simple, but it is possible. First you need to aknowledge your qualities and defects. With pluses and minuses, remaining aware that all people are the same. There is no perfection and there is a balance of these pluses and minuses in all of them.

An important step would be the acknowledge of karmic laws. From them you can understand that everything that happens in life, good or bad, is closely related to your person and to what you offer to others. The result of your life will come straight from what you offer to others.If you offer kindness and love, this is what you will get in return. If you offer hatred and malice, this is exactly what will come back at you.

I wrote these few words as I am increasingly stunned, disappointed and bereaved by everything that is happening in the society in general and in particular in the Romanian one. People are full of frustrations. They feel vicarious pleasure, and they suffer enormously for other people’s succeses. They fill up with malice and they feed themselves with other people’s problems, instead of their own accomplishments. Because by thinking this way, they will not succeed anymore. They will be burden by these accumulated negative energies and growing frustrations, thus contaminating the whole society. Unfortunately, this is the current trend.

As an aside, I lived today a great disapointment, seeing that persons that once set Thames on fire with their qualities and met social appreciation and aknowledgment, fell on the slippery slope of frustrations, by comparison to others who went beyond them then and there. The irony is that those persons blame the frustrated people bearing them a grudge, but in turn they put themselves in the same situation, that of frustrated people, in regard to those who „allowed” themselves, by a more intelligent approach of some things or social environments, to leave them behind.

As a conclusion, even those who succeed and get out of ruck are seriously injured by the same ugly scourge of frustration. Many times, more powerful. Sad, even pathetic.