Applicable Sentencing Policy - Counsel for the accuser referred to the Supreme Court's ruling that ordered a harsher punishment for white-collar offenses, in which it was the professional and social status that created the background conditions that enabled the commission of the offenses; It also ruled that a reduced sentence should not be considered in these offenses due to the damage caused to the defendant's high status as a result of the criminal proceedings and the conviction. As to the penalty range, counsel for the accuser argued that for the most part, the offense of obstruction of justice is accompanied by other offenses, unlike the "Biton" charge and the "night meeting" charge, in which the offenses stand on their own, and therefore the penalty ranges determined in the case law hardly separate the punishment from the main offense and the punishment from the offense of obstruction. Counsel for the accuser referred to the following judgments: Criminal Case (Shalom Jerusalem) 38168-01-16 State of Israel v. Olmert (February 10, 2016) - The appropriate penalty for the offense of obstruction of justice is 3 to 9 months in prison; Criminal Case (Shalom J.M.) 28998-04-13 State of Israel v. Abunjema (February 18, 2015) - The appropriate punishment for the offense of obstruction ranges from a tangible punishment without an actual prison sentence to a few months of actual imprisonment; Criminal Case (Tel Aviv District) 60588-12-18 State of Israel v. Talmor (4.1.2023) - The appropriate penalty range for two offenses of obstruction of justice on two charges and for the offense of failing to comply with a requirement under Securities Law, was sentenced to 6 to 12 months in prison.
The appropriate punishment area - In accordance with all these considerations, counsel for the accuser argued that the offenses of disruption for which Fisher was convicted in the first incident are of a high degree of severity, in view of the uniqueness of the case at hand, both in terms of the nature of the acts and in terms of the nature of the perpetrator. Therefore, according to her, the appropriate punishment for these offenses – the 'Biton' charge and the 'night meeting' charge – should be 3 to 9 months in prison.
- The Event The second is the offense of attempted bribery and the offense of obstruction of justice for which Fischer was convicted In the fourth indictment ('The Alon Hassan Affair').
In her argument, counsel for the accuser insisted that this incident, which took place more or less parallel to the acts described in the 'Yair Biton affair', was heavier and more serious. This time, too, Malka leaked information to Fischer from a sensitive investigation at Lahav 433, which began as an undercover investigation, in which a client of Fischer's (Hassan) was interrogated. Fischer took advantage of his position as a respected and recognized lawyer; the great trust placed in him by the client (Hassan) and the enforcement systems; and the client's dependence on him – in order to demand bribes in the amount of ₪150,000 (more than half a million shekels according to the representative rate at the time), which he presented as a bribe to the policeman; And not just any policeman, but a senior investigation officer in charge of investigating Hassan. This was after Fischer spoke with the same officer about the case during the undercover investigation stage. This is not money for a mere action related to the role of the policeman, but money that is intended, according to Fischer's suggestion, "Killing the Affair"And"Finishing the story". Such statements by a lawyer towards his client, who is in the midst of an exciting and very low event in his life due to exposure to arrest proceedings, a criminal investigation and an indictment, constitute a very serious breach of trust and an extreme exploitation of the power and information disparities and the client's dependence on the lawyer. Fischer presented his proposal with devotion, determination, and in a series of meetings over a period of time, until he succeeded in convincing Hassan to accept it, all for the sake of money. As part of his attempts at persuasion, Fischer made use of his connections with Malka and the information he received from Malka, through sophisticated manipulations and demonstrating proficiency in the secrets of the investigation.