FROM PRISON, NICOLAE POPA MAKES AN EXCLUSIVE, STATEMENT FOR BURSA: "I was never tried, I was not allowed to defend myself!"

Hi, Make!

Excuse for not being as formal with you as you were with me in the letter you sent me, but I feel that the fact that we've known each other for so many years (ever since back in the day of ownership certificates, right?!) entitles me not to be.

I would prefer to remain silent by not answering your questions, just like I have refused to make any statement to those in the General Prosecutors' Office (July 12th, 2012/ Chief Prosecutor Şelaru), who were interested in the same subject.

Perhaps the right question to ask me would have been (and, honestly, that is what I was hoping to find in your "questionnaire") why my request for a retrial was denied after my extradition (art. 522(1) Criminal Procedure Code and the Law no. 302/2004 concerning extradition) considering that a retrial is usually granted to those who are extradited in at least 98% of cases (!), even when they have clearly fled prosecution and court investigation.

I have to remind you that I was never investigated, interrogated, but that all of these phases of the criminal lawsuit unfolded in my absence, and took place long after my (legal!) departure from Romania.

As for my arrest in Jakarta and my extradition to Romania ... there is a lot to be said about the illegalities committed by the Romanian state, as well as by the Indonesian one. What remains, however, is the persistence in denying me my legal to a retrial (better said: to a trial!) so that I would have the possibility to formulate my legal defenses.

Could this have happened because it would have meant finding out that the entire lawsuit concerning the FNI (just like the one around the FNA) was scripted and badly led from the beginning? And then, my innocence (and not just mine!) could have been proven? And this would have proven by default the incompetence and lack of professionalism of those who built the two cases.

Or maybe it's because by accepting my retrial, I would have automatically went from being a convicted criminal to being a mere defendant and then ... how could Sorin Vîntu be convicted for "aiding and abetting a criminal"... without a criminal?

I would advise you to read the briefs no. 41.348/3/2011 - of the Court of Bucharest - Second Criminal Department (FNI) and 42.438/3/2011 - of the Court of Bucharest - First Criminal Department (FNA) (including the appeal and second appeal stages) concerning my retrial. In the FNI case my retrial was denied based on article 466 of the NEW (!) Criminal Procedure Code - which is not yet in effect!!! - and in the FNA case under claims of ... PARTIAL avoidance of prosecution (sic!)

And another aspect: Why did the 12-year sentence in the FNA case remain final by default (!) when I had already been arrested in Indonesia for the purpose of extradition? The law says that the cases are separated and are tried after the extradition. Either that, or, the provisions of art 522(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code apply and ... a retrial must take place!

Unfortunately, in Romania, the courts obey the indications of TB rather then the criminal legislation.

What else can I do? Wait for the European Court of Human Rights and...for better times...