Mahmut for the Dehar case: Do not quote conclusions translated by Prizren Prosecutor

He's stopped to conclude one by one that we're bringing back.

The original French text reads:

“                                                    CONCLUSIONS

Sur la Base de l ensemble des éléʹments à novons disposit et suite aux Analyses affects nos laboratores, nous puvons adputre les concessions suivantes:

1. Comme persecutedé dans notre expertise EI 180001, nous avos des doutes conserent les circonsances du décès de M. DEHARY Astri. In effet, Ihypotèse d'idicide de M. DEHARl Astret par le moen avancé pars médecins légists parait peu pesemblable et l intervention dão tierce personin dans le fatal prosus doit être évoquée”.

In the official version of English translation, the introduction and conclusion are thus translated:

“Based on all the elements we have available and on the continuation of the analysis done in our labs we can accept the following conclusions:

1. As stated in our expertise El180001, we have doubts related to the circumstances of Mr. DEHARY Astri. Actually, Mr. DEHARRI Astrit through certain means by legal doctors seems a little real and intervention of a third person in the fatal process should be taken into account”.

My translation:

“Based on the whole of the elements that have been placed at our disposal and after tests made in our labs, we approve the following conclusions:

1. As highlighted in our expertise, EI180001, we have doubts as to the circumstances of Mr. Astrit Dehari. Actually, the veracity of Mr. Astrit Deharit, with tools the legal doctors say, seems small and another person's intervention in the fatal process should be mentioned”.

From the official translation of the first conclusion, it gives the impression that supposedly Swiss experts left as something subject to the presence of the other person (“to the third person” as translated “our personrece”), which “we should consider”.

Actually, the expertise comes to the conclusion that the other person's intervention should be mentioned, which means that he was objectively present. This objective is based on the DNA results that Swiss experts have found in samples taken from Astrit Dehar's watch.

The objectivity of the other person in the fatal process also relates to the second conclusion.

In the original French text, the second conclusion reads:

“2. Les Analyses DNA effections don't laboratoriere ont permis de meter in evidence un profile DNA sur un échantillon décrit par les experts au Kosovo comme contentant trop peu ou after dCDN”.

In the official version of English translation, the second conclusion is this:

“2. DNA analyses conducted in our labs have enabled a DNA profile on the sample described by Kosovo experts as containing little or very little DNA”.

This translation, with a syntax that does not correspond to the syntax of the Albanian language, creates confusion.

My translation:

“2. DNA tests conducted in our labs have enabled them to highlight a DNA profile in a sample, which Kosovo experts describe as containing little or no DNA”.

Initially, it should be emphasized that through distorted translation (“little or little DNA”) has tried to conceal the fact that the Kosovo Agency for Forenzice did not run DNA tests on the sample taken from the Astrit Dehari class, with the reasoning that it supposedly contained “p or no samples DNA”

What Does the Bible Really Teach? Labo: 19-T03497, involved in the supplementary expertise EI 190001, dated September 9th 2019), the Swiss expert points out that “From the samples we've taken from the same hour, we've been able to extract the DNA profile of an unknown man named in the report as H1. This result implies that, of course, DNA profiles can be extracted from other tracks that are not analysed by the Kosovo Agency for Forenzice. Such tests can also be done by DNA, already released by the Kosovo Agency for Forenzice or by samples carried out by the Romande University Legal Medicine Centre in Loza as long as the material is preserved”.

So we have the third conclusion of the Swiss forensics team, through which they express their readiness to contribute to the lighting of the case “Astrit Dehari”.

In the original French text, the third conclusion reads:

“3. Au vu de ce qe qi peécède, nous estimos quavelle enqe et nécessitaire afin de clarifier les circonstances du décès de M. DEHARY Astri. No équipes et nos laboratores sont à disposition des enqêtours en charge de l affire.

Le matériel miss à disposition du CURML va rester péserrvé in attent de nouvels installes de la part de nore mandant”.

In the official version of English translation, the third conclusion is this:

“3. From what was said, we appreciate that a new investigation is necessary to clarify Mr. DEHARY Astri. Our teams and our labs are available to investigators in charge of the case.

The material that is available by CURML will be saved in anticipation of new instructions on the part of our mandate”.

My translation:

“3. In view of what was said earlier, we appreciate that a new investigation is necessary to illuminate Mr. Astrit Dehari. Our teams and our labs are available to investigators in charge of this case.

Waiting for new instructions on the part of those who have given us the mandate for this research, the material that has been made available to the Romande University Law Medicine Centre in Lausanne will be preserved”.

Obviously, when it comes to materials that will be preserved on the part of the Romand University Legal Center in Lausanne, the translation is completely wrong. The French text clearly states that we are dealing with materials that have been made available to him by the one who gave them the mandate to do their expertise. To confuse everything, the translation claims that these material “to be maintained pending new instructions on the part of our mandate”, which means mandate of the Romane University Centre for Legal Medicine in Lozanne.

The conclusion could not be expected by those who have begun to confuse things in the first sentence of translating expertise on June 14, 2019.

The first paragraph of the EI180001 expertise explains who, to whom I mandate to do this research.

In the original French text, the first paragraph explains:

“Nous avons rechu de M. Metush Biray, Procureur national de la République du Kosovoo, un mandate daté du 05 fevrier 2018, dans le cadre dedde déentraide international. C M. DEHARRI Astrit, né le 26 fevrier 1990”.

In the official version of English translation, this paragraph is translated:

“We have received from Mr. Metush Biraj, national prosecutor of the Republic of Kosovo, a package of February 5th 2018, in the wake of a mutual international aid requirement. This package has been addressed to the Romand University Legal Medicine Centre with the request to undertake all independent investigations needed to illuminate the death of Mr. DEHARRI Astrit, born on February 26, 1990...”

My translation:

“By Mr. Metush Biraj, state prosecutor of the Republic of Kosovo, has received the mandate that holds February 5th 2018.

Within a request for mutual international assistance, by Mr. Metush Biray, state prosecutor of the Republic of Kosovo, we have received a mandate, dated February 5th 2018. This mandate has been addressed to the Romand University Legal Medicine Centre in order to undertake all independent research necessary to shed light on the death of Astrit Dehar, born on February 26, 1990...”.

It is not surprising that those who confuse “mandatin” with “paco”, have “packaged” sentences that have not been converted to those who have tried to hide the murder of Astri Dehar.

At the conclusion of this scripture, but it brings the whole conclusion of my translation:

Converts

Based on the whole of the elements that have been placed at our disposal and after tests made in our labs, we approve the following conclusions:

1. As highlighted in our expertise, EI180001, we have doubts as to the circumstances of Mr. Astrit Dehari. Actually, the veracity of Mr. Astrit Deharit, with the means the legal doctors say, seems small and another person's intervention in the fatal process should be mentioned.
2.  DNA tests conducted in our labs have enabled them to highlight a DNA profile in a sample, which Kosovo experts describe as containing little or no DNA.
3. In view of what was said earlier, we appreciate that a new investigation is necessary to illuminate Mr. Astrit Dehari. Our teams and our labs are available to investigators in charge of this case.

Waiting for new instructions on the part of those who have given us the mandate for this research, the material that has been made available to the Romande University Law Medicine Centre in Lausanne will be preserved.