The Supreme Court discussed a situation of transferring the tactical burden in a criminal appeal 384/80 State of Israel v. Ben Baruch [Published in Nevo] (January 27, 1980), where the following were determined:
"But as is well known, a person's knowledge – as well as his behaviour – can be learned not only from direct evidence, but also from the overall circumstances of the matter, which may form an assumption as to that knowledge or conduct. The strength of this assumption depends on the "specific weight of the system of circumstances" (in the words of my esteemed colleague, Justice Shamgar inCriminal Appeal 15/78 [1], at p. 80), where the weight of this assumption is considerable, and it is persuasive beyond a reasonable doubt, that assumption may reach the extent necessary for the formulation of criminal responsibility. Of course, this assumption, which is nothing but the fruit of logic and life experience, can be contradicted. A person is not convicted on the basis of a negative thought that he may have, but only on the basis of a criminal thought that he has. Therefore, a defendant may bring evidence or give explanations that show that the logical assumption is not logical at all or that the strength of the assumption, in light of his explanations, is not capable of sustaining the degree of proof required in a criminal trial. But where the defendant did not shoulder this tactical burden, and did not bring evidence or give satisfactory explanations, the assumption becomes a reality."
See also the Supreme Court's reference to the transfer of a tactical burden, as given only yesterday in a criminal appeal 2854/18 Eliad Moshe v. State of Israel [Published in Nevo] (August 27, 2019) (paragraph 87 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice Stein).
Beyond the transfer of the tactical burden, which is necessary in the circumstances of the case, consideration must also be given to the fact that in the situation that was created, the possibilities that the defendant had to present rebuttable evidence were significantly greater than those in the hands of the prosecution.
The prosecution defined, and rightly so, the aforesaid in its summaries, with reference to criminal appeal 231/76 State of Israel v. Friedman, IsrSC 31(1) 309, where the following was determined: