Caselaw

Serious Crimes Case (Beer Sheva) 63357-03-18 State of Israel – F.M.D. V. Assaf Masoud Suissa

February 15, 2021
Print
Be’er Sheva District Court
Serious Crimes Case 63357-03-18 State of Israel v. Suissa (Detainee) et  al. February 15, 2021

 

Before The Honorable Judge Yael Raz-Levy – Presiding Judge

The Honorable Judge Gilat Shalev

The Honorable Judge Aharon Mishnayot

 
The Accuser State of Israel – Pamad

By Attorney Ravit Marom

Against  
The Defendants 1. Assaf Mas’ud Suissa (detainee)

 By Adir Ben Lulu and Adv. Tal Cohen Tabibi

2. Mor-Meir Maslawi (detainee)

 By Adv. Neil Simon

Verdict

Judge Gilat Shalev:

Overview

An indictment was filed against the defendants, in which they were charged with murder – an offense under  section 300(a)(2) of the Penal Law, 5737-1977 (hereinafter: the Law), as drafted at the time the offenses were committed; arson – an offense under section 448 of the law; carrying a weapon – an offense under  section 144(b) of the law; and obstruction of justice – an offense under section 244 of the law.

The Indictment

According to the facts of the indictment, there was a prior acquaintance between Defendant 1 and the late Advanat Shumunov (hereinafter – the deceased; it should be noted that the evidence indicates that his name was also Ephraim Shimonov – G.S.); And there is a friendly relationship between the defendants against the background of their joint work at HOT, in which they used to meet and socialize together.

On February 25, 2018, the defendants met with other friends at the home of defendant 1 in Sderot, and smoked a dangerous cannabis-type drug together.  At some point in the evening, the defendants left the house and met with the deceased at his home in Sderot; During the meeting, the deceased offered the defendants that he sell them a dangerous cannabis drug weighing about 70 grams, which he presented to the defendants at the time of the meeting, for NIS 60 for each gram (hereinafter: the drug); The defendants asked the deceased to "taste" the drug and agreed with him that they would purchase the drug from him the next day.  After the meeting, the defendants left the place and after a while, knowing that the deceased had gone to work and was not at home, they returned to the scene and observed the deceased's home with the intention of breaking into it and stealing the drug; The defendants tried to enter the deceased's home through the windows and door of his house, and when they were unable to do so, they left the scene without carrying out their plot.

The next day, on February 26, 2018, at noon, the deceased arrived at the home of defendant 1 while defendant 1 was not at home, and in accordance with the agreement between them, he placed 56.5 grams of a dangerous cannabis-type drug for the defendants, divided into 8 units.  In the evening, the deceased contacted defendant 1 and arranged a meeting with him during which defendant 1 would transfer to him the monetary consideration for the drug he received.  Against the background of the aforementioned drug debt, the defendants decided to murder the deceased.

1
2...202Next part