Second, the memorandum shows that the negotiations conducted with Malka prior to the filing of the indictment were so deep, in such a way that information from the government was collected, not as an interrogee, but as a confidential intelligence source, and not as part of the open criminal investigation that was conducted against him at the time. Since the law does not recognize a 'hybrid' in which an intelligence source provides confidential information at the same time as being a suspect who is being interrogated under caution and is liable to become an accused, Malka was not necessarily in danger of being used in a criminal proceeding against him in those days. The notices were intended only to allow the Department for the Investigation of Police to examine the possibility of reaching an agreement with Malka as a state witness, and nothing more; And this is indeed written in the written and signed summary between Adv. Bartal and Saada that has not been found to this day Even though this is material investigative material. Indeed, the very collection of intelligence information from a suspect under investigation constitutes a kind of 'sign' that negotiations are underway with him in preparation for a state-witness agreement. This was confirmed by an audio chamber from his rich investigative experience: "I've recruited enough people as state witnesses, I've never heard of an insight document like you say, I don't know anything like that... A person gives a clean version, if it is intelligence and needs to be classified later, then some of it is open and some of it is intelligence, and then an agreement is signed" (7999).
In practice, not only was the fact that until the discovery of the memo of May 10, 2015 (which was hidden in the offices of the Department for the Investigation of Police in a pile of forms to be filled out – P193/2), the fact that during the days of Malka's arrest and interrogation prior to the filing of the indictment, he provided the Department for the Investigation of Police with intelligence information; However, even after this fact had already been discovered, it became sadly clear that the intelligence information itself, which Malka provided, was not documented or stored by the Department for the Investigation of Police, in a manner that constitutes a double violation: both of the internal procedures that require the documentation of intelligence information provided to an intelligence coordinator or an investigator (as confirmed by Saada at pp. 22290, 22446), and of the law instructing the investigating authority to include in the list of investigative material intelligence material that the defendant has no right to review (section 74Kindness"P). See an update provided by the accuser's counsel at the hearing on March 6, 2023, regarding the findings of searches conducted in the intelligence system and the intelligence file of the Department for the Investigation of Police and the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court Secretariat, in light of the hypothesis that the presentation of the intelligence information, to which Malka's lawyer finally gave his consent as stated in Saada's memorandum, was made by the Department for the Investigation of Police during a hearing that took place on the day the memorandum was written on a request to extend David's detention (22407-22403; N195/2; N196/2).
- This hypothesis, according to which the intelligence information provided by Malka was submitted at the hearing on the extension of David's detention, was used by Saada to attribute the disappearance of the information to this. His explanation, as presented in his cross-examination of March 19, 2023, argued that due to the proximity of the time between receiving the information from the Kingdom and presenting it in court, the Intelligence Coordinator did not have time to transmit the information to be typed in the computerized system, but made do with putting the matter in writing in an intelligence memorandum taken by the claimant who appeared at the detention extension hearing and left it in the Magistrate's Court (22451-22448).
This explanation, too, remained dependent on containment (what's more, even if it was factually correct, it would still expose another fundamental failure in the manner of documenting and preserving investigative materials in the Department for the Investigation of Police). A few weeks later, in a hearing on May 4, 2023 (which was scheduled following an urgent request filed the day before), the court was informed that on April 30, 2023, Sa'ada contacted the prosecution team – Despite the fact that he was in the midst of his cross-examination at the time - He said that he found in his home a document related to the intelligence information mentioned in his memorandum dated May 10, 2015. The document in question, which was subsequently submitted as evidence (N198/2), which Saada kept and found in his home, is an email sent on May 10, 2015 at 19:39 by the Director of the Department for the Investigation of Police, Uri Carmel, to the State Attorney and the Deputy State Attorney for Criminal Affairs. The message was printed from the email box of "Moshe Saada". The subject of the message is: "The results of the request for an extension of detention in an amended format - according to Y.M.". In the body of the message, it is written as follows: