Roman Giertych Wanted to Take Over the Buddha Case? This Is His Reaction to Sensational Reports

But it was not the allegations against influencers that recently caused the greatest stir in the legal and media community, but the way in which lawyer and politician Roman Giertych tried to get involved in the case, Wirtualna Polska reports.

Kamil Labudda, better known as "Budda," built his media power on the raffles he organized, where prizes included luxury cars. His channel boasts 2.5 million subscribers, and his name has become synonymous with spectacular prizes and philanthropy—such as the donation of 100,000 złoty during the Grand Finale of the Great Orchestra of Christmas Charity.

In October 2024, the Central Bureau of Investigation of the Police, acting on orders from the West Pomeranian Branch of the National Prosecutor's Office, arrested the influencer, his partner, and several other individuals. Investigators allege that Labudda and his associates evaded taxes by selling lottery tickets along with e-books and paying only 5% VAT instead of the required 23%. The prosecutor's office also accuses them of money laundering and participating in an organized crime group. The sum at stake is as much as PLN 126 million, and the seized assets—worth a total of PLN 140 million—included 51 luxury cars, real estate, and bank accounts.

Defenders from the front pages of newspapers

The pair of detained influencers were initially defended by experienced attorneys: Mateusz Mickiewicz and Krzysztof Tumielewicz in the "Buddy" case, and Kacper Stukan, Katarzyna Walukiewicz, and Marta Kowalińska in the "Grażynka" case. Despite their efforts, they were unable to avoid arrest.

A few days after the arrests, Roman Giertych intervened in the case—at least in the media. He appeared publicly as Aleksandra Krcha's defense attorney, saying, among other things:

"I'm waiting for the prosecutor's office to kindly consent to a visit. And I believe that withholding such consent is contrary to human rights."

According to journalists, it was Giertych himself who informed them about his alleged participation in the defense of "Grażynka" and inspired publications on this subject.

Attempt to get into the case: requests, pressure and threats

As Wirtualna Polska has determined, on October 21, 2024, Giertych contacted attorney Katarzyna Walukiewicz, one of Aleksandra Krcha's three appointed defense attorneys. The attorney could not be added to the case because Polish law only allows three defense attorneys for one suspect. In the conversation, Giertych initially requested a substitute, citing his "greater experience" and acting "at the request of the client's family."

"Initially, he suggested I provide a substitute, as he had more experience. He also claimed he was acting at the request of the client's family," Walukiewicz told Wirtualna Polska.

After Attorney Walukiewicz's refusal, the conversation changed tone.

"He started asking who I was, that I was even involved in this case. He claimed he really didn't want to do it, but he could do it, and he might have to do it so that in a few minutes I wouldn't be in the case," the lawyer said.

In her opinion, this was behavior characterized by pressure and an attempt to intimidate.

"I perceived it as an attempt at extortion. I felt threatened and felt my competence was being questioned," Walukiewicz added.

Unsigned documents and emails from the law firm

Roman Giertych persisted in his attempts. He submitted a request to the National Prosecutor's Office to participate in the case as Aleksandra Krcha's defense attorney. The letter was signed by attorney Krzysztof Pawlak "acting as Roman Giertych's substitute" and included an attachment with a defense authorization signed by a third party. The prosecutor's office refused his participation, stating that the suspect already had three defense attorneys.

After this decision – as Szczecin lawyers report – Giertych allegedly called again with demands for substitution.

"So he started calling us, telling us to provide him with a substitute. If we didn't, he would make sure we weren't involved in the case at all," says attorney Kacper Stukan.

Stukan's law firm then received an email from the address belonging to Aleksandra Krcha's mother. It contained a scanned copy of a letter terminating the power of attorney and requesting that all documents be sent to a mailbox… on the domain of Roman Giertych's law firm. Interestingly, the file data had been stripped of its metadata—only information about the use of the "Notes iOS" app remained.

A few minutes after this email, Giertych sent Stukan an SMS message:

“I have learned that the client’s mother has terminated your authorization based on an oral power of attorney to terminate authorizations.”

Attorney Stukan immediately contacted "Grażynka's" mother, who assured her that the email address was hers. The problem was that—as the defense attorneys emphasized—Grażynka did not use the computer, and Aleksandra Krcha categorically denied granting her mother such powers of attorney. On a printout of the mother's message, she wrote, "I do not confirm," and signed it.

300,000 PLN for a "defense that never took place"

In the background, there were also talks about hiring another well-known lawyer, Jack Dubois, who ultimately did not join the defense of "Buddy."

"The talks continued, but ultimately ended in failure. As a result, I am not participating in this matter and I would like to emphasize that I am not and will not be a representative of Mr. Kamil L.," Dubois said.

According to the findings, an acquaintance of "Buddy," known on Instagram as "Kamil from America," paid for the two lawyers—Dubois and Giertych—without the influencer's knowledge, transferring a total of approximately PLN 300,000. Both lawyers received PLN 150,000 each.

When WP asked Dubois if he represented Labudda, he initially refused to answer, citing attorney-client privilege. After further questioning, he changed his story:

"I was appointed in this case and the power of attorney was submitted to the prosecutor's office. I took defense action. The suspect, choosing a different line of defense, did not confirm the power of attorney."

After being released from custody in December 2024, "Budda" and "Grażynka" did not use the services of either of these two lawyers. Meanwhile, "Kamil from America" attempted to recover the funds, but — according to WP information — the lawyers deducted "service fees," meaning a full refund was not forthcoming.

In March 2025, the National Prosecutor's Office received a notification of possible misappropriation of funds by attorneys. The case is currently being handled by the District Prosecutor's Office in Warsaw.

Complaint to the Disciplinary Ombudsman

The lawyers filed a complaint about Roman Giertych's actions with the Disciplinary Spokesman of the Warsaw Bar Association. "We decided it couldn't be left like this. I felt my colleagues were terrified, because Roman Giertych had directly threatened them. He told me I'd be finished if I didn't let up," says attorney Kacper Stukan.

The complaint also included the following fragment:

"It's impossible to shake the impression that attorney Roman Giertych decided to become the suspect's defense attorney, regardless of her will, and to this end, he undertook a series of unethical actions. In a case of such media and public interest, misleading the public (by a professional defense attorney) seems even more contrary to the principles binding on attorneys."

The Disciplinary Ombudsman is currently conducting an investigation into the matter. As attorney Maria Sankowska-Borman reported, three disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against Roman Giertych since the beginning of 2025.

The silence of "Grażynka", the attack of Giertych

Aleksandra Krcha declined to comment on Roman Giertych's actions. Kamil Labudda also declined to comment. Giertych himself responded to WP with a letter in which he firmly refutes the allegations and attacks the editorial office:

“The suggestions contained in your questions that I acted on behalf of anyone without the appropriate authorization to defend myself signed by an authorized person in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure are false and constitute yet another attempt to violate personal rights,” he wrote to the WP journalist, adding:

"Such a settlement took place and the persons who were parties to it (and no one else) never made any claims in this respect."

In the further part of his response, Giertych accuses the Wirtualna Polska editorial office of acting in the interest of the Justice Fund and accuses it of "criminally influencing" lawyers.

What's next?

The case of "Buddy" and "Grażynka" is still ongoing, and alongside the tax and money laundering allegations, a new thread has emerged that's reigniting tensions in the legal world—the line between marketing and legal ethics. Did Giertych cross that line? The Disciplinary Ombudsman's decision will provide the answer.

Read also: Poles are ruthless towards Giertych. These data say it all.

Read also: Polish politicians under fire from Grok. AI attacked ruthlessly. Musk responds