The Verdict
- Given that the appellant is acquitted of many offenses for which she was convicted, the sentence imposed on her should be significantly reduced. However, I did not believe that in our case the punishment should be reduced to the extent that it was determined that it would be carried out by way of community service. I'll explain.
- As mentioned, we have before us another difficult case of a kindergarten teacher who uses violence against toddlers and small children. There is no need to go into detail about the great severity inherent in these offenses, which in turn justifies the imposition of significant prison sentences (see: Criminal Appeal 4302/18 Bukstein v. State of Israel, para. 8 [Nevo] (January 21, 2019) (hereinafter: the Bukstein case)); Criminal Appeal 830/23 Kassis v. State of Israel, para. 33 [Nevo] (June 18, 2023) (hereinafter: the Kassis case)).
The need to increase the punishment for these offenses also stems from considerations of deterrence of the public (in accordance with the To the section 40g Law The Penalties, which deals with the location of the defendant within the appropriate punishment area). This is because the victims of the offense in these cases are toddlers or young children who are unable to self-report the injuries they experienced; And given that the acts of violence are carried out far from the eyes of the parents' supervisor (although it must be admitted that in kindergartens where cameras are installed that are open to parents, the weight of this element in the argument is weakened). This fact has a direct impact on the need to adopt a strict punitive policy, which is intended, inter alia, to deter potential offenders (see: Matter Cassis, in paragraphs 42-43; Interest Binyamin, in paragraph 19 of the judge's opinion Knafi-Steinitz. For a similar discussion regarding sexual offenses committed against minors in the family, see: 288/24 Anonymous v. State of Israel, paragraph 16 [Nevo] (December 18, 2025). For a different opinion, see: Alon Harel "Criminal Law" The Economic Approach to Law 655-659 (Uriel Procaccia ed., 2012)).
- However, in the present case, not only does the significant change that has occurred in the appellant's conviction justify the reduction of the prison sentence imposed on her, but also the fact that most of the acts of assault for which she was convicted, as well as the act for which she was convicted of leaving a child unsupervised, are of low severity; and some of the assaults are of medium severity. As is well known, the guiding principle in determining a sentence is the principle of proportionality, which requires "the existence of an appropriate relationship between the severity of the offense in the circumstances and the degree of guilt of the defendant and the type and degree of punishment imposed on him" (section 40B of the Penal Law; Criminal Appeal 1964/20 Asfa v. State of Israel, para. 12 [Nevo] (August 12, 2020). See also: Yoram Rabin and Yaniv Viaki, Penal Law, 3 - Criminal Punishment 66-70 (Fourth Edition, 2022)). Alongside the principle of proportionality is an equally important principle, which is the principle of uniformity in punishment. This principle indicates that in similar cases, in terms of the nature of the offenses and the circumstances of the case, similar penalties should be imposed. Thus, in order to prevent discrimination between similar defendants and in order to maintain the public's confidence in the criminal proceeding (see, Mini-Many: Criminal Appeal 9545/09 Aladdin v. State of Israel, para. 11 and the references there [Nevo] (March 24, 2010)). As a result of this principle, the court is required, inter alia, to maintain a reasonable level of punishment between different defendants. Therefore, when the court sentences the defendant, it must compare the acts he committed with other acts and the punishments imposed by the court in relation to them, in order to create an appropriate punitive hierarchy between these cases, and in this way prevent "a situation in which a certain person who has been convicted of a certain offense will already be punished by an unknown person who has been convicted of a more serious offense" (Criminal Appeal 2247/10 Yemini v. State of Israel, Paragraph 79 [Nevo] (January 12, 2011). See also: Criminal Appeal 2580/14 Hassan v. State of Israel, para. 19 [Nevo] (September 23, 2014); Criminal Appeal 2309/22 Kudryavtsev v. State of Israel, para. 10 [Nevo] (August 7, 2022)).
These basic principles do not retreat even when dealing with violent offenses committed against minors, since even in these cases it is possible to distinguish between more serious and more serious cases. The Judge Knafi-Steinitz discussed this distinction and its implications in the matter Binyamin, saying that: