See the court's words in criminal appeal 4909/02 State of Israel v. Borowitz (March 31, 2005):
"... And even when it comes to a multi-participant offense, the prosecution may, for practical reasons, suffice with prosecuting some of the perpetrators of the offense."
The Claim of Uniformity of Punishment:
- In its arguments for the sentence, the defense mentioned the role of defendant 3 in the affair. Although the defense attorney did not raise an explicit argument regarding uniformity in punishment with respect to the sentence of defendant 3, I found it necessary to do so.
- In my opinion, the mention of defendant 3's role in the affair is misplaced and does not reduce the sentence of the defendants, since there is a significant difference between the offenses of which the defendants were convicted and the offenses of which defendant 3 was convicted.
Moreover, the circumstances of the commission of the offenses by the defendants are profoundly different from the circumstances in which the offenses were committed by defendant 3. Thus, for example, and in stark contrast to the small part of Defendant 3, the defendants were the dominant, the executors and the "living spirit" of the fraudulent venture. Thus, for example, and in contrast to defendant 3, the defendants acted for the sake of money and for a number of years.
It should also be recalled that defendant 3 was convicted as part of a plea bargain in which the accuser argued for a sentence of 6 months in prison to be served with community service, while the defense argued that he was not convicted. The accuser explained that the plea bargain that was formulated in the case of defendant 3, unlike in the case of the defendants, also stemmed from evidentiary difficulties.
As the case may be, the sentence imposed on defendant 3 does not affect the sentence of defendants 1 and 2.
Conclusion:
- Therefore, From all of the above, I sentence the defendants to the following sentences:
About Defendant 1:
- 44 months in prison, minus the days of her detention.
- 12 months suspended imprisonment for three years from the date of her release, which she will not commit any of the offenses of which she was convicted.
III. A fine of ILS 300,000 or 10 months imprisonment in lieu thereof. The fine will be paid On 30 equal and consecutive payments (10,000 ILS each) starting from 01.04.26 and every 01 of the following month.