4:10 min: The deceased lost his balance while moving and fell to his knees on the road. The cell phone he was holding falls off and the flip flops he was wearing fall off his feet.
4:18 min: The deceased gets up from the road and while in a kneeling position, he reaches out his hands towards the defendant's right hand, which is holding a gun. In response, the defendant moves his right hand upwards.
4:21 min: As the defendant continues to push back, it appears that the deceased makes another attempt to reach out to the defendant's right hand holding the gun.
4:26 min: The deceased continues to attack the defendant, who was pushed backwards and finally knocks him down on the road near the railing. The defendant moves his right hand to the side and back.
4:29 min: The defendant falls on his back with his right hand holding a pistol close to the road. It appears that at this stage, the deceased's hand is extended towards the defendant's right hand, which moves his hand.
4:32 min: The defendant rolls on his back to the other side of the railing, with the deceased kneeling on his arms and knees next to him. At this point, gunfire was heard.
4:34 min: The defendant is lying on his back on the road, on the other side of the railing, with his right hand still holding the gun and facing up and back. The deceased kneels over the defendant and appears to be trying to hold the gun, or the defendant's right hand.
4:37 min The deceased rises from his kneeling position and at this point his body is seen recoiling backwards, apparently due to additional gunfire, since, immediately afterwards, the witness David Haimovich is heard saying: "Here he shot him".
- As stated, the defendant claimed that the two bullets fired from his pistol during the struggle on the floor, as described above, hit the deceased, and one of them, which led to his death, was unwittingly ejected from his pistol. The defendant's argument has two aspects: first, that the defendant did not intend to fire the deceased with these two bullets at the same stage. Second, that the defendant was not even aware that these two bullets had been fired.
I am of the opinion that this argument of the defendant is unreasonable and inconsistent with common sense and the logic of things. As detailed above, these two bullets were fired during the struggle between the defendant and the deceased on the floor, during which the defendant and the deceased were a few centimeters apart. It is difficult to accept the argument that the defendant did not feel the firing of two bullets fired from the pistol he was holding, did not feel the recoiling of the gun, did not hear the sounds of gunfire and did not notice that the deceased had been hit. This is even more true when the two are close to each other throughout the struggle between them and the defendant shoots the deceased at point-blank range. This is particularly striking given that eyewitnesses Tomer and David Haimovitz, who watched the incident from their cars, with the car windows closed, the air conditioner on and music playing from the radio, noticed that the deceased had been hit by gunfire. Moreover, as noted, while watching the video, the sound of gunfire of the first bullet was heard and the deceased's body was seen to be recoiled following the firing of the second bullet.