Defendant 3 to whom the indictment attributed, As part of the second indictment, offenses of bribery and the prohibition of money laundering, he pleaded not guilty.
Defendant 4 (hereinafter – Azoulay) who admitted to the facts of the original indictment outside of a plea bargain, was convicted of fraud and breach of trust, according to Article 284 of the Penal Law, in the context of the facts of the The first charge, and was sentenced to a conditional prison sentence, a 200-hour prison sentence and a fine of NIS 5,000.
Defendant 5 (hereinafter – Ben-Zaken) was convicted as part of a plea bargain of the offense of aiding and abetting breach of trust, according to Article 284 Together with Article 31 of the Penal Law, in the context of the facts of the The first charge, and was sentenced to a prison sentence of four months, which was agreed between the parties that he would serve concurrently with another prison sentence that he served at that point in time. In addition to this component, the defendant was fined NIS 65,000 and a conditional imprisonment.
Defendant 6 (hereinafter – Yehuda) was convicted of three offenses of the prohibition of money laundering - aiding and abetting the conduct of an operation in property and providing false information with the intention of not reporting or in order to cause incorrect reporting, according to Section 3(b) Together with Section 7 The Prohibition of Money Laundering Law and Section 31 of the Penal Law, in the context of the facts of the The Third Charge. As part of the plea bargain reached between the parties, it was agreed that the defendant would be sentenced to a conditional prison sentence and a fine of NIS 75,000, and these are the components that were sentenced to the defendant at the end of the day.
Summary of the Dispute Arena and the Structure of the Judgment
- After Ben-Eliezer's death and the formulation of plea bargains with defendants 4-6, the factual issue remains to be decided The First and Second Charges, and the question of the alleged criminal involvement of Defendant 2 (in relation to the first charge) and of Defendant 3 (in relation to the second charge), who are indisputably transferred significant sums of money to Ben-Eliezer.
- According to the prosecution, the sums of money transferred by the defendants to Ben-Eliezer should be regarded as bribe payments, against the background of a number of economic interests they held, and in light of alleged actions carried out by Ben-Eliezer in order to promote those interests.
- According to the two defendants, the sums of money were transferred to Ben-Eliezer, at his request, against the background of his friends, and in view of his serious medical condition at the time, and their desire to assist him in purchasing an apartment that suited his needs and limitations.
- As part of the verdict, I will first review the foundations of the offense of bribery, the various tests outlined in the case law in relation to these elements, and then I will move on to an examination of Ben-Eliezer's data and his medical condition at the point in time when the funds were transferred to him by the two defendants – these chapters are common and relevant to the hearing of the two charges.
After the "joint" chapters, I will hold a separate hearing on the matter of each of the charges (and the defendants), where I will address and decide on each of the various and relevant arenas of contention.