It was further held in the Ashta case, ibid., in paragraph 6 of the judgment, as follows:
"At the end of an exchange between the two, and following a sexual expression by the deceased, the appellant spontaneously decides to use a knife. With a quick wave of his hand, out of an offensive aim, and not in the event of a physical struggle, the appellant stuck the knife in the neck of the deceased... Even after the knife was pulled from the deceased's neck, the appellant did not help him, but fled the scene in the hope that he would not be caught. In these circumstances, even if there remains doubt as to whether the 'presumption of intent' has not been perfected, there is no doubt that the appellant is not the one who acted 'in the hope of succeeding' in preventing the fatal result, and in any case it is absolutely clear that he is not frivolous."
In the Ashta case, as stated, the appellant was convicted of murder with indifference at the end of the day and the appeal was dismissed.
- Yes they saw Criminal Appeal 2132/23 Naor Biton v. State of Israel (September 1, 2024), where it was determined, inter alia, in paragraph 22 of the judgment, as follows:
"In case law, it has been determined more than once that it is possible to deduce a mental element of indifference from the acts for which the offense of manslaughter is attributed to the defendant... It was also determined that a case of firing several bullets from an improvised weapon at two people, causing the death of one of them, constitutes a particularly serious case of murder with indifference... To this, it should be added that the defendant's actions after the killing may indicate indifference, such as ignoring the victim's difficult situation..."
And from the general to the individual:
- As determined above, the defendant was aware of the firing of the two bullets during the struggle between him and the deceased on the floor, and he was also aware that these two bullets hit the deceased. There is no doubt that in these circumstances, the defendant was aware of the possibility of causing the fatal result.
- It is also necessary to examine whether it is possible to determine, on the basis of the presumption of intent and the aforementioned auxiliary tests, that the defendant intended to kill the deceased, as the accuser claims, or whether he was indifferent to the death of the deceased.
We will further note that when we are dealing with the standard of proof required in criminal cases, if there is doubt in this context, the defendant is entitled to benefit from it.