The Honorable Judge Yael Raz Levy: Yes, rain, weather, it's called checking if it's alive or dead in your opinion?
Defendant 1: Compared to the temperature that the rain created in us, the cold it created in us, the hands were more...
The Honorable Judge Yael Raz Levy: If it's a test, a test is something I have a result for, I tested and... Now you said that even when you came back, you still hoped he was alive.
Defendant 1: At that moment, I checked his leg and he had no pulse.
The Honorable Judge Yael Raz Levy: Oh, did you check? Wait, wait, then...
Defendant 1: With my leg I said yes, I held him in the leg and there was no pulse.
The Honorable Judge Gilat Shalev: I asked you about your heart rate and you told me I didn't check, I didn't think about it at that moment, you told me: 'I checked the temperature.'
Defendant 1: I said I grabbed it in the leg, I caught it in the leg, in the leg... Anyone who has passed a basic 48-hour course, which is now mandatory in every matriculation exam... I know that through the leg you can check if there is blood flow, if there is a pulse.
The Honorable Judge Gilat Shalev: No, I asked you explicitly and you told me I didn't think about it, you don't think about all the things at that moment, you were talking about temperature only, I asked this question explicitly...
Defendant 1: So I'll also remind you that you did that with your hand already, right?... That's how I didn't check, that's how I didn't check, I grabbed him in the leg and he didn't have a pulse... If, for example, a person says, "I caught him... And the person says no, I didn't catch him like that so he means a hand, she asked me how I checked my pulse and grabbed her hand... I didn't check my pulse with my hand... I caught my leg, there was no pulse.".
In this context, it should also be noted that although defendant 1 claimed in his testimony that it was already clear to them that he was dead when they arrived with the deceased in the car, and even claimed that they checked the deceased's leg again to see if he was alive or not before they decided to disappear the body (p. 345), he claimed that when they went to the gas station, he told defendant 2 that if they saw that the deceased was alive when they returned, they would leave him in the car and do nothing (p. 346, paras. 3-6). When asked how these statements were consistent with his statement that he had checked and made sure that the deceased had died even before they went to the gas station, he replied in a twisted manner that he had indeed examined the deceased and understood that he was dead, but that he had prayed in such a way that when they returned they would discover that he was still alive (p. 370, paras. 10-15). In his cross-examination, defendant 1 gave a number of answers in this regard, claiming on the one hand that he was not sure that the deceased had died when the car was burned, although at this stage the deceased did not control his body (pp. 378, paras. 22-24); On the other hand, he claimed that he would not have burned him if he had not been sure that he was dead, repeated his explanations that the deceased was cold, did not react and had no pulse, and claimed that unlike the situation before they went to the gas station, this time he was 100% sure that the deceased was dead, but he was unable to explain the difference (pp. 379, 4-15); He later claimed that at the stage when they went to the gas station, he was 99% sure that the deceased was dead and hoped that when they returned they would find out that he was alive (pp. 417-418).