(c) Criminal Case (Hai District) 45690-02-14 State of Israel v. Mashiach (January 11, 2018) - Defendant 2 was convicted, according to his confession, as part of a plea bargain, of bribery and forgery of a document with the intention of obtaining anything through it. He falsely presented himself to drivers who committed traffic violations, as a lawyer who could help them by virtue of being connected to police officers. The drivers, dozens in number, transferred two sums of money to the defendant in order for him to act in their favor at the police. Defendant 2 granted favors to defendant 1, who served in the police as an officer with the rank of commander in charge of traffic enforcement, in return for his actions in the framework of his position for the benefit of those drivers. The favors were not large sums of money and were mainly in items of clothing, toys, food, furniture, etc. Defendant 2 had a criminal record that included 12 previous convictions for violent and property offenses. The Probation Service noted his lack of awareness of the seriousness of his actions, and assessed that there was no real chance of his rehabilitation and his refraining from committing offenses again. The appropriate penalty range for Defendant 2 was set at 12 to 36 months in prison. The court took into account the fact that defendant 2 admitted at the first opportunity after the indictment was significantly corrected in her voice (an amendment made after hearing part of the prosecution's case), as well as his personal circumstances and the fact that his criminal record is distant years, and sentenced him to 12 months in prison, minus the days of his detention. An appeal filed to the Supreme Court against the severity of the sentence was dismissed by consensus (Criminal Appeal 1643/18).
In Parashat Messiah, the court insisted that the defendants committed the offenses in many cases over a period of three years, and that this was not a one-time lapse. In addition, defendant 2 received money from dozens of drivers for his illegal activities. In addition to the conviction for bribery, he was convicted of forging a document with the intention of obtaining anything through it, by drawing up a false affidavit of a driver who was obligated to deposit his driver's license, and handing it over to the police officer who acted on behalf of that driver on the basis of the false affidavit. The verdict also noted that the defendants' actions were likely to endanger the public to the point of endangering human lives, in light of the refraining in exchange for bribes from the suspension of the licenses of drivers who committed traffic offenses and endangered road users. In contrast, in the case before us, we are dealing with a single case; Fischer did not receive some of the bribe money; The amended indictment remains vague on the question of whether Fischer intended to take some of the money for himself, even if the attempt had been successful; his criminal record is clean; His rehabilitation has already begun and his chances are good, according to the testimonies; In practice, no damage was caused to Hassan's criminal investigation as a result of the bribe money he transferred to Fischer.