Excerpts from the confession of the President of the Freedom Party, Ilir Meta, published for the first time from prison.
Meta has written new facts and evidence, previously unspoken and unpublished, regarding January 21, September 14, '98, as well as the case of Azem Hajdari.
In his post, Meta also speaks of blackmail attempts, illegal wiretapping, as well as the political use of video montage that, according to him, served as an alibi for calling the January 21 protest, which ended with four victims.
"Their recovery, in addition to exposing many politicians, businessmen and journalists who were wiretapped, not only in offices, but also at home, also revealed a video where 80 thousand euros were clearly visible that the gentleman was receiving from his Deputy Minister at home," Meta wrote in his post.
Excerpts from Meta's story about videos, wiretapping and blackmail:
But let's get back to some truths, with the video montage that was used as an alibi to call for the protest.
First, not even an official agency from the US, UK, etc., refused to conduct an expert examination of the video, because they knew better than us what it was.
Secondly, surprisingly, instead of taking the video to an audio expert, the Prosecution took it to a private computer (i.e. video) expert.
Meanwhile, there was no problem with the video, namely who the two people were.
The only and main problem was the authenticity of the conversation accompanied by subtitles and through the editing.
So, by chance, the American expert, during his search of the watch handed over by the "corruption whistleblower", found many other videos of him, which he had "deleted" thinking they were gone forever.
Their recovery, in addition to exposing many politicians, businessmen, and journalists who were wiretapped, not only in their offices, but also at home, also revealed a video where the 80 thousand euros that the gentleman received from his Deputy Minister at home were clearly visible.
For this reason, the Prosecution was formally forced to launch an investigation, since the American expert had sent it a report on the case.
But no one mentions it, and the (b)analysts are doing a good job.
Let's continue with my investigation.
The Prosecution Office deliberately violated the investigation procedures, hoping that I would request the closure of the case through court proceedings.
Although we requested and insisted that our experts be present at every expert examination that the Prosecution would select, this never happened intentionally.
Surprisingly, the Prosecutor who was assigned to handle my case, during the implementation of the Justice Reform, as part of the background check, was declared by the Files Authority as a collaborator of the State Security.
But the Court later declared that it had been another person and thus, the gentleman became a member of the High Prosecutorial Council, which also baptized the first SPAK Prosecutors.