Yehezkel also explained that the friendly relationship he had with the defendant, as well as the long-standing business partnership, led to many money transfers between them, and at certain points in time they made an offset in relation to the sums that each gave to the other.
- I got the impression that Haim Yehezkel fully cooperated in his interrogation, did so without hiding data, described everything that was required to be described (and even more) to the police investigators, and later testified credibly in court. It is important to note that Yehezkel, at the time of his interrogation, had no motive to put himself at risk and admit to transferring a significant sum of money to an incumbent public figure, and the conclusion drawn from this has implications for the authenticity of his version. The argument that arises between the lines of the prosecution's summaries is an argument that Yehezkel "took upon himself" the first transfer of funds, despite the fact that it was made with the defendant's money, but this argument is inconsistent with the logic of the matter, and is inconsistent with the various testimonies that were presented.
- In its summary, the prosecution argued that a careful reading of Yehezkel's version shows that it contradicts the defendant's version on a number of points, the main of which are: (a) The Purpose of Money [a race for the presidency (according to Yehezkel) or buying a house due to a serious health condition (according to the defendant)]; The exact amount [$50,000 (NIS 178,900) or NIS 260,000]; Lack of sufficient explanation for the fact that Ben-Eliezer denied contacting him with a loan request; Lack of documentation of NIS 260,000 accounting.
I cannot accept the argument that this is a contradictory version, and certainly it is not a matter of contradictions that go to the root of a version, and the reasons for the claim that have been detailed do not teach about this.