UPDATE:
Leonīds Jākobsons has categorically denied to Latvian media that he consented to be placed in a mental hospital for obeservation, essentially calling the pietiek.com story misleading or a fabrication. Jākobsons says that he was placed in the hospital despite protesting the decision to put him under observation to the investigating prosecutor.
The police and prosecuting authorities have not denied that they (or so they claim) had the legal right to confine Jākobsons for 30 days of observation (a measure usually applied in civilized countries to those suspected of a crime so violent or bizarre that, instead of a pre-trial confinement to jail, the suspect is examined to settle the possible issue of sanity at an early stage). I could see this being done, God forbid, to someone firing a sniper rifle at the maiden topping the Latvian Freedom Monument and loudly shouting that the pink crocodiles in the nearby Bastejkalns park canal were dancing and singing a song telling him to do this.) But it should not have been done to Jākobsons.
The Latvian investigative journalism portal Pietiek.com claims that the Latvian journalist Leonīds Jākobsons consented to being confined to a mental hospital for observation in connection with an investigation of his role in publishing leaked e-mails from Riga mayor Nils Ušakovs.
The story (in Latvian) is here: http://www.pietiek.com/raksti/_neka_personiga__noklusejis,_ka_jakobsons_pats_piekritis_ievietosanai_psihiatriskaja_slimnica
It mentions that the psychiatric examination was based on a 20 year old medical record that may have questioned Jākobsons mental stability.
Pietiek.com also indirectly mocks those journalists and public figures who hastened to call Jākobsons hospitalization (where he says he was together with murder suspects) an outrage.
While the issue of exactly how and why the controversial editor of the Russian-language kompromat.lv ended up in the "loony bin", and why it was not reported at the time (late 2011?) is a gap in the whole story and may reflect flawed journalism, it is also possible that Jākobsons was pressured into agreeing (perhaps facing pre-trial arrest in a similar social environment of murderers, thieves, etc.).
Leonīds Jākobsons has categorically denied to Latvian media that he consented to be placed in a mental hospital for obeservation, essentially calling the pietiek.com story misleading or a fabrication. Jākobsons says that he was placed in the hospital despite protesting the decision to put him under observation to the investigating prosecutor.
The police and prosecuting authorities have not denied that they (or so they claim) had the legal right to confine Jākobsons for 30 days of observation (a measure usually applied in civilized countries to those suspected of a crime so violent or bizarre that, instead of a pre-trial confinement to jail, the suspect is examined to settle the possible issue of sanity at an early stage). I could see this being done, God forbid, to someone firing a sniper rifle at the maiden topping the Latvian Freedom Monument and loudly shouting that the pink crocodiles in the nearby Bastejkalns park canal were dancing and singing a song telling him to do this.) But it should not have been done to Jākobsons.
The Latvian investigative journalism portal Pietiek.com claims that the Latvian journalist Leonīds Jākobsons consented to being confined to a mental hospital for observation in connection with an investigation of his role in publishing leaked e-mails from Riga mayor Nils Ušakovs.
The story (in Latvian) is here: http://www.pietiek.com/raksti/_neka_personiga__noklusejis,_ka_jakobsons_pats_piekritis_ievietosanai_psihiatriskaja_slimnica
It mentions that the psychiatric examination was based on a 20 year old medical record that may have questioned Jākobsons mental stability.
Pietiek.com also indirectly mocks those journalists and public figures who hastened to call Jākobsons hospitalization (where he says he was together with murder suspects) an outrage.
While the issue of exactly how and why the controversial editor of the Russian-language kompromat.lv ended up in the "loony bin", and why it was not reported at the time (late 2011?) is a gap in the whole story and may reflect flawed journalism, it is also possible that Jākobsons was pressured into agreeing (perhaps facing pre-trial arrest in a similar social environment of murderers, thieves, etc.).
3 comments:
Jākobsons denies that he has voluntary given his consent though:
http://www.apollo.lv/zinas/jakobsons-noliedz-ka-pats-piekritis-ievietosanai-psihiatriskaja-slimnica/554830
Pietiek melot!
Portāls Pietiek.lv (kura spoguļvietne ir pazistama ar nosaukumu Pietiek.com) dezinformē sabiedrību.
Es nekad nedevu savu piekrišanu tiesu psiholoģiskās ekspertīzes veikšanai. Es pārsūdzēju izmeklētāja Naura Liepiņa lēmumu prokuratūrā. Man atbildēja, ka tādu ekspertīzi var norīkot katram, ko tur aizdomās par jebkādu noziegumu. Pēc izmeklētāja rīkojuma ekspertīze tiek veikta экспертиза проводится obligātā kārtā. Slimnīcā es atteicos parakstīt piekrišanu ekspertīzes veikšanai. Bet tas neko neizmainīja. Ekspertīze tika veikta mēneša garumā. Rezultātā ārsti nonāca pie slēdziena, ka es esmu psihiski vesels.
Portāls Pietiek.lv ziņo, ka tā rīcībā ir materiāli no krimināllietas NR-1-27002013/10, kurā es esmu apsūdzētais. Es vēršos tiesībsargājošiem orgāniem ar prasību pārbaudīt, kādā veidā krimināllietas materiāli ir nonākuši portālā Pietiek.lv rīcībā.
Pietiek melot!
Portāls Pietiek.lv (kura spoguļvietne ir pazistama ar nosaukumu Pietiek.com) dezinformē sabiedrību.
Es nekad nedevu savu piekrišanu tiesu psiholoģiskās ekspertīzes veikšanai. Es pārsūdzēju izmeklētāja Naura Liepiņa lēmumu prokuratūrā. Man atbildēja, ka tādu ekspertīzi var norīkot katram, ko tur aizdomās par jebkādu noziegumu. Pēc izmeklētāja rīkojuma ekspertīze tiek veikta obligātā kārtā. Slimnīcā es atteicos parakstīt piekrišanu ekspertīzes veikšanai. Bet tas neko neizmainīja. Ekspertīze tika veikta mēneša garumā. Rezultātā ārsti nonāca pie slēdziena, ka es esmu psihiski vesels.
Portāls Pietiek.lv ziņo, ka tā rīcībā ir materiāli no krimināllietas NR-1-27002013/10, kurā es esmu apsūdzētais. Es vēršos tiesībsargājošiem orgāniem ar prasību pārbaudīt, kādā veidā krimināllietas materiāli ir nonākuši portālā Pietiek.lv rīcībā.
Post a Comment