To the defense attorney's question, defendant 2 replied that he had met a defense attorney for the first time only "after all this saga of the investigations, towards the end"; After hearing the court's comments and the accusing attorney, he replied that he had met with Adv. Simon for the first time during the first remand extension in court, and then hired the services of Adv. Haimi. According to him, Adv. Weiss of the Haimi Law Firm met with him and told him to stick to the version he gave and not to change it, and therefore he continued to give the same version in subsequent interrogations as well. In response to the court' s question, defendant 2 confirmed that during the meeting with Adv. Simon in court and afterwards when he met with Adv. Weiss, he told them that the interrogators had threatened him and promised him that he would be released and that he had given his version due to the pressure exerted on him; He reiterated that he was told to adhere to his version (pp. 472-474).
In his cross-examination, when the prosecutor referred him to what he had said in his various statements regarding the planning and manner in which the murder was committed, defendant 2 replied that he had made incorrect statements, as a result of pressure and threats exerted on him by the interrogators; When the other interrogator told him that he had "gone for it," he threatened that a guillotine was placed over his head and that he was going to prison for life, but the words were not recorded. As stated, he claimed that the interrogators told him to say that Defendant 1 planned and did everything, and told him that if he dropped everything on Defendant 1, he would go home; And he simply said what he was told, and made up a story to appear credible.
Defendant 2 clarified that the policemen who pressured him were the ones who were in the room where he was taken after the interrogation, with the commander of the Central Intelligence Unit and Investigator Malichi, but he did not remember their names; and that the interrogators Zami and Benita were not among them. He also clarified that the threats he refers to are the statement that he has a guillotine over his neck and the entire situation in which "when you are put into a room and told you, 'We know about the murder, we know what happened, your partner opened everything on you, a guillotine is placed on you,' isn't that threats? Isn't that addressing a person in the form of trampling on the person? Isn't it?" (p. 501, s. 8-10, and also p. 503, s. 6-10, p. 510, s. 25-30). Regarding the claim that if the commander of the Central Intelligence Unit had exerted pressure on him, he would not have insisted that he did not murder the deceased but would have broken down and confessed, Defendant 2 replied that "this is what they instructed me before this. 'Throw everything at [Defendant 1]'... The improper behavior is that you are taken to the room and not explained. This is the behavior, this is the threats, the pressure, the trampling of the person" (pp. 512, 22-27).