Third, and although the defense did not explicitly seek to deviate from the scope for considerations of justice, I will note that the decision in the Lupoliansky case (criminal appeal 5669/14) and the exception to the appropriate punishment range there were made "against the background of the special circumstances of that case, which indicated that a prison sentence may lead to a substantial shortening of his own life expectancy, due to his illness." Clearly, this is not the case before me.
As stated, the appropriate balance between the severity of the offenses and the circumstances of their commission and the consideration of the complex family situation of defendant 2 will be made in the location of her sentence on the floor of the appropriate punishment area. An additional reduction in the sentence of defendant 2 in the form of deviation from the appropriate punishment would sin against the court's duty to eradicate the evil from within him, and may, God forbid, send a false message to the public of forgiveness and inclusion in affairs such as this.
Determination of the penalty within the boundaries of the compound:
- In determining the sentence of the defendants within the boundaries of the compound, I took into account that they have no criminal record and this is their first entanglement with the law. The defendants confessed, spared judicial time and expressed remorse for their actions.
I also considered the passage of time since the offenses were committed and the fact that the defendants have not been involved in criminal matters since then.
- Defendant 1, about 26 years old, completed her bachelor's and master's degrees in religious studies at the University of Hebron and is currently continuing her doctoral studies there. According to the details in the report, the defendant led a normative life before committing the offenses and since then has been dealing with emotional difficulties as a result of the divorce process. In accordance with N/21, she completed her teaching studies at the al-Qassami Academy in Baqa al-Gharbiya, but according to her, she was fired due to the legal process about a month after she began her work as a school teacher in the city of Rahat.
- Defendant 2 is about 27 years old, married and the mother of three children between the ages of 2 and 8, and is in the midst of a bachelor's degree in mathematics at the University of Hebron.
For the sentencing hearing, I paid attention to the fact that defendant 2 is dealing with considerable family complexity. The defendant's youngest son was diagnosed as having special needs and in accordance with N/27 and N/28 he is entitled to a disabled child pension from the NII at a rate of 100%. According to A/29, her daughter needs treatment by a speech therapist.
- Although the defendants expressed their desire to be involved in a therapeutic process, I gave my opinion to the severity of the sentence and to the impression of the Probation Service that the defendants' attitude to the offenses is diminishing and minimizing their severity.
- The leniency in the commission of offenses for which the defendants were convicted, the extensive use of cyberspace and banking services as platforms for committing offenses, the severity of the acts and the enormous damage caused by them, oblige the court to give due weight to the many deterrence considerations (Section 40g to the Penal Law) so that the potential offender will be afraid of committing similar offenses in the future.
- After balancing the various considerations, I found that defendant 1's sentence should be placed in the lower third of the appropriate penalty range and defendant 2, in view of her family difficulties, on the floor of the compound.
I will note that if it were not for the special family circumstances of defendant 2, it would have been appropriate to place her sentence in the lower third of the appropriate punishment range.