(Lue sama suo­mek­si.) #

I was allowed to make a recor­ding of the inter­ro­ga­tion, but the hand­so­me police­man doing the inter­ro­ga­ting for­ba­de me from publis­hing it, or his name. For publis­hing the writ­ten report of the inter­ro­ga­tion, I’m sup­po­sed to ask for per­mis­sion from the Oulu police. #

I’m hap­py I had made a writ­ten sta­te­ment for myself in advance, and all I’ve said the­re was pret­ty much all that was asked, so making it public here effec­ti­ve­ly tells the essen­tial of what was ques­tio­ned - apart from some obvious ques­tions concer­ning whet­her or not I am the admi­ni­stra­tor of mummila.net and whet­her the posts at issue here were indeed writ­ten by me, as well as the curious fact that the inves­ti­ga­tion at this point seems to be focused only on two of the three texts which were ori­gi­nal­ly cen­so­red by the police. #

A trans­la­tion of my sta­te­ment fol­lows. I’m just trying to throw it out quickly so any blun­ders I’ve made are hope­ful­ly just due to bad trans­la­tion and not pre­sent in the ori­gi­nal. #

Sta­te­ment #

I do not know Ilk­ka Pöy­ry per­so­nal­ly and all my cri­ticism towards him has been based on infor­ma­tion concer­ning his acti­vi­tes avai­lable from the Kaleva.plus web­si­te^[1] along with the report of the inci­dents at the Kori­vaa­ra school as shown on tele­vi­sion^[2]. My cri­ticism was strict and some vul­gar expres­sions were used, but under no circums­tances was it unfair or dis­pro­por­tio­na­te in rela­tion to Pöy­ry’s acti­vi­ties as a teac­her of a publicly fun­ded Fin­nish ele­men­ta­ry school and the complaint filed against him^[3]; being a teac­her means hol­ding a public posi­tion, and as such, Pöy­ry needs to deal with even rough public cri­ticism. #

At no point have I made any fal­se hints or lied, since all the facts concer­ning Pöy­ry I’ve pre­sen­ted were based on the sources below. In my wri­ting I’ve pre­sen­ted my per­so­nal opi­nion on the mora­li­ty of Pöy­ry’s acti­vi­ties, especial­ly uti­lizing the lite­ra­ry means of paro­dy and sati­re. At all times, all such fic­tious mate­rial has been easy to tell apart from actual facts of the case. #

Refe­rences #

[1] http://www.mummila.net/marginaali/?p=1006
[2] http://www.yle.fi/a2/juttu.php?tunnus=2216
[3] http://www.laaninhallitus.fi/lh/oulu/bulletin.nsf/vwSearchView/ DF60F6C937904B2CC2256F66003283CA #

The inter­ro­ga­tion went well and the police officer was very much mat­ter-of-fact, as I had antici­pa­ted. Right after having left, I had to go back when he cal­led me; he nee­ded to fix the time of the inter­ro­ga­tion for the report and I had to be pre­sent for the alte­ra­tion. So he was care­ful about the details as well, which I think is good. #

Oh, and I got a let­ter from the Sta­te Pro­vincial Offices of Oulu yes­ter­day, infor­ming me that my complaint had been recei­ved. The police has been asked to report on the mat­ter, and after that I’ll have a chance for anot­her sta­te­ment should I want to make one. They should deci­de on the complaint wit­hin three months. #

[muok­kauk­set]
[muokkaus][klo]13:06[/klo] I think it’s refe­rences, not sources. Fixed the mis­sing link to Fin­nish version.[/muokkaus]
[/muokkaukset] #