UNA CU NATURA
Before we arrived at the construction site, the "environmental apostles" were waiting for us with three cameras already recording. When we stopped the ATV, one of them provoked us into violence, using diversion tactics similar to those practiced by members of the #Rezist group: they film their "targets" while harassing them until they lose their temper, then post edited, forged videos on social media to portray their victims in a negative light to the public. The same method of "operation" was used on May 24, 2015 (video 13.1).
Gabriel Păun began to misinform the authorities and the public about the events at Râul Alb immediately after leaving the scene. He lied about his "coincidental" presence at Râul Alb and falsely claimed he was beaten "instantly" when we arrived at the site. He sent false messages about the events at Râul Alb and manipulated public opinion and the course of the investigation with forged video collages. But before anything else, some clarifications are needed regarding the video made by Păun, which he titled: "Attempted Murder of Agent Green Investigator 24.05.2015". The video recording shows the time as 17:52:00, instead of the actual time of 13:00:00 when the events occurred. Păun's "profession" as Agent Green involves capturing information in flagrante delicto, which requires precise dating of recordings. Certainly, Agent Green came with the declared intention of recording and broadcasting images from Râul Alb. Given that the timestamps on his recordings do not match reality, it confirms that the images were edited and tampered with hours later, with the evident purpose of obstructing the truth.
The original version of the video recordings would have shown the true story of the "Râul Alb Scandal", and on May 24, 2015, the fugitives had at least three opportunities to hand over the recording devices if they were acting in good faith and wanted the truth to come out:
They could have gone directly to the police with the recordings;
They could have gone with the police officers to retrieve the camera and Păun;
They could have handed over the devices during the initial hearings before the prosecutor.
Why didn't they hand over those pieces of evidence "instantly"? You will understand from what follows.
Before Păun's hearing began (at 20:05), the "eco" agents were already stars on the news. The titles of the collages posted on YouTube on the evening of May 24, 2015, before the "activists" appeared for hearings, are telling:
"Attempted Murder of Agent Green Investigator" – promoted by the NGO Agent Green,
"Professional Video Analysis of the Criminal Ambush in Retezat" – promoted by the NGO Nostra Silva,
"Activists Attacked, Râul Alb, Dinosaur Geopark" – promoted by the NGO România Curată,
"Shocking Scenes in Retezat" – promoted by Nostra Silva.
In reality, it turned out that these collages were just bait thrown to a gullible public who had placed great hopes in the "environmental defenders". The titles demonstrate a deceitful abuse of trust taken to the extreme. It seems unbelievable, but so far, no police officer, prosecutor, or judge has been interested in accurately establishing the chronological sequence of events. No one asked the activists what they did minute by minute, from the time of the criminal attack until they appeared for hearings.
Through the Whirlwind of False Statements
Gabriel Păun, Tudor Tudoran (his lawyer), and Weidinger Gerit (his friend from Austria) admit that they retrieved the camera hidden in the bushes, but they contradict each other regarding the timing of the retrieval. The Austrian woman says they took the camera before going to the hospital (the taxi episode), while lawyer Tudoran states that this happened after visiting the Emergency Room. Finally, Gabriel Păun stuck to lies that contradict all testimonies.
Gabriel Păun: "Together with lawyer Tudor Tudoran and Gerit, we went to retrieve the camera, and after finding it, we checked if there were video recordings on it and saw a few images for a second and also heard the associated audio recording, convincing me that there was evidence. I did not watch the entire recording. At the police station, in my presence, the recorded images on the discussed camera were not viewed; I don't know what the others did." (...) "I don't know when the recordings were handed over to the prosecutor, but I remember that on the evening of May 24, 2015, the recordings reached a television station where I also went; it was already night, after the hearings at the Hațeg Police Station" (doc.1).
Lawyer Tudor Tudoran: "As the lawyer of the injured party Gabriel Păun, I accompanied him and his friend Gerit, an Austrian citizen, when they retrieved the video camera that had been in Gerit's possession and which she had hidden out of fear; I told them that it might contain evidence and that it needed to be recovered. After retrieving it, I asked for the camera and believe that I watched the entire recording with the two of them, and the images were transferred, creating a copy on my laptop. On the same occasion, I also asked for and received from Gabriel Păun the card containing the images he had recorded with his phone camera to preserve the evidence. The retrieval and examination of the images took place somewhere outside the locality, on the road from Hațeg towards Coroiești, after Gabriel Păun had been to the hospital and before going to the police authorities. After that, we went to the police headquarters in Hațeg, where statements were taken from Gabriel Păun and his friend, and I assisted with the hearings. I remember that before the hearings, we did not present the images to the investigators" (doc.2).
Weidinger Gerit: "The video camera I used does not belong to me; it does not have a memory card, meaning that everything filmed remains in the camera's memory, and I indicate that the recording was copied in electronic format, also giving a copy to Mr. lawyer TUDOR TUDORAN. I kept a copy for myself, and another copy I handed over to a German television station. At this moment, I no longer have the respective recording on the video camera, which I deleted when I arrived in Austria."
Alin Andrioni: "I remember that after the incident, during the investigation, before the statements were taken, the first case prosecutor watched a recording together with Gabriel Păun, his lawyer, and the journalist, and they saw the circumstances of the incident; then they went outside and told me what had happened" (doc.3).
Evidence Handed Over to Investigators Upon Resumption
From their statements, it is clear that they failed to synchronize their lies, but we know for sure at least two things: 1. They watched the recordings; 2. They downloaded them onto a computer (at least). And certainly, they were edited because otherwise, their concealment cannot be explained. On the afternoon of May 24, 2015, the so-called environmentalists concocted those false collages, which they posted on social media to create the impression that we were the "brutes" of an internationally impactful aggression. The collages were sent to the Prosecutor's Office attached to the Hunedoara Tribunal via email a few days later by Bogdan Tudor-Todoran.
Tele-Justice with the Prosecutor
During the hearings on the evening of the attempted murder, tele-justice was playing on a television set at the police station, competing with the official investigation. According to the statement of the accused Alin Andrioni, the prosecutor watched a recording together with Păun, his lawyer, and Weidinger Gerit before taking the first statements. Strangely, the prosecutor and the criminal investigation bodies made no effort to have Alin Andrioni, Gabriel Păun, and Weidinger Gerit hand over the recording devices and the original recordings, which were essential pieces of evidence for uncovering the truth.
The false collages "dictated" the course of the investigation in favor of those who provoked the attack at Râul Alb. To understand, the original recordings never made it into the attempted murder case file, but the prosecutors never requested them either. In the orders they issued, they did not ask forensic experts to determine whether the videos were authentic. The digital fingerprint unequivocally shows that the recordings submitted to the file had been edited.
