Caselaw

Criminal Case (Jerusalem) 28759-05-15 State of Israel v. Eran Malka - part 52

January 13, 2026
Print

Given Fischer's conviction for bribery, it is assumed that he intended to receive a warehouse of bribe funds intended to bring assistance from the police in Hassan's investigation file.  The amended indictment also describes the WhatsApp message that Malka sent to Fisher on June 19, 2014, in which he advised him to invite Hassan to him that night in order to "Will bring a package" (paragraph 14), as well as Malka's knowledge of the meeting scheduled for the transfer of the money on July 3, 2014 (paragraphs 18-19).  The only mitigating circumstance that can be taught here about Fischer is the question of the impact of the gift on the content of the decisions that were expected to be made in Hassan's investigation file, to the extent that Fischer had succeeded in his attempt to obtain the bribe money from him in order to give it to the policeman.

It should be noted that the amended indictment does not allege that Fisher's failure to appear for Hassan's detention hearing on May 27, 2014, caused Hassan harm.  Moreover, the indictment states that the conversation referred to Fischer's appearance alongside another lawyer on Hassan's behalf, who will also appear at the hearing, while Fischer's presence was related to the media aspect.

  1. The profit that Fisher was expected to derive from committing the offense - In view of what is stated in the amended indictment (section 15) that Fischer lied when he told Hassan that the bribe money would be transferred in full to the police official involved in the investigation, and that he (Fischer) would not receive any of the funds, it is assumed that Fischer was expected to derive a financial profit from the bribery brokerage, although the amount of the expected profit is unknown. In any event, even if we adhere to the description that appears at the end of the fourth indictment (section 22) according to which the sum of $150,000 was intended to be given entirely as a bribe to the policeman, since the mediation attempt was made against a client (Hassan) to whom Fischer provided legal services relating to, inter alia, the investigation (section 2), Fischer should at least be seen as someone who sought through the mediation attempt to derive a personal benefit for himself as well.

            At the same time, it should be reiterated that in the amended indictment, the fraud offenses attributed to Fisher in the "Hassan affair" were deleted, and therefore Fisher did not deceive Hassan.  In addition, the amended indictment deleted the sections that linked Malka and Fischer's actions to the "method" in which Fischer received from the interrogees large sums of money that he shared with Malka, after a certain affair with the state's witness (see paragraph 15 of the original indictment, as well as paragraph 7 of the indictment).  This deletion also has significance for the question of the profit that would have been expected of Fischer had the bribery brokerage attempt been successful.

Previous part1...5152
53...123Next part