Adv. Bartal added that he was in the United States at the time of Malka's arrest (April 29, 2015), and returned to Israel around May 4, 2015 (p. 21795; see also his remarks at the hearing of June 10, 2015 in the motion for detention until the end of the proceedings, N. 204/2 - p. 16, paras. 23-24). While in the United States, he instructed Malka to remain silent during the interrogation until his return to Israel (21769). Upon his arrival in Israel, he drove directly from the airport to Malka, and agreed with the management of the Department for the Investigation of Police that Malka would collect a cleanliness testimony. The agreement was put in writing in front of Saada on yellow paper. Adv. Bartal signed the document, and in his opinion, Saada also signed it. Only afterwards did Malka begin to give his statements in which he cooperated with his interrogators (21770, 21800, 21813). Adv. Bartal's recommendation to Malka was to tell as much information as possible in the framework of the cleanliness testimony, since by doing so he would secure himself according to the law as much as possible (21773, 21814, 21820-21819).
Malka's special status, as someone who has given his statements since May 4, 2015 as part of negotiations for a state-witness agreement, was also expressed in the exceptional treatment given to him by the Department for the Investigation of Police even before the agreement was signed. For example: the opportunity given to Malka on May 19, 2015, while he was in detention, to meet his lawyer at a café in Latrun (21761).
Moreover. After it was edited "Agreement for Cleanliness Testimony"Moving on to the delivery of the statement on May 4, 2015, and while Malka is cooperating with his interrogators and has since given a series of statements prior to the filing of the indictment, the management of the Department for the Investigation of Police conveyed to Adv. Bartal, mainly through Saada, oral promises regarding the benefits that will be granted to Malka after the indictment is filed and a state's witness agreement is signed with him (Adv. Bartal's statement at the Competition Authority dated November 3, 2022, P/456, Q. 10-21, 56-59; His testimony at pp. 21769-21763, 21779).
- The testimonies given by Malka's lawyers in the eighth year of the trial, following the prosecution's decision to conduct a further completion of the investigation at the time, support the new version given by Malka himself that year, in which he fundamentally changed the version he gave during his original testimony in court in 2017-2018. Malka's consistent version during those years was that his decision to cooperate with his interrogators as of May 4, 2015 was not related to any promise he was given, but stemmed entirely from an internal decision he made to tell the truth."After my conscience torments me for many months and after many deliberations" (Question 38 of the notice of May 4, 2015), and being in the position of "Suspect who broke down and decided to confess" and not in an official capacity, neither of a state witness nor of a suspect with whom negotiations are being conducted toward a state-witness agreement (p. 2250; and 1624, 2323-2315, 2433, 2614-2609, 2878-2873, 2944, 3087).
This version was reversed in Malka's testimony in the Bar Association's Disciplinary Court of December 13, 2021 (N163/2). As part of the hearing on the Bureau's request to impose a penalty of expulsion from the Bureau, Malka testified that during his interrogation at the Department for the Investigation of Police "Some kind of dialogue has begun, negotiations for a state witness", and that the condition for being a state witness was "that I will confess to committing offenses during the interrogation and only after the indictment is filed will the agreement be signed with me. When things were already closed even before the agreement". According to him, the state's refusal to sign a state witness agreement with him before the indictment was filed stemmed from the ruling in Rabbi Pinto's case. His confession during the interrogation of the suspicions attributed to him was given."On the basis of that promise" that the agreement will be signed with him after the indictment is filed, "When the construction of the agreement is already being discussed during the interrogation rooms... Especially with Moshe Saada... Mainly, the main dialogue with Moshe Saada is the authority" (pp. 66-67 of the transcript).