Although, sadly, horrific, sadistic cases of deliberately beating toddlers and babies have been brought before the courts, and are still being brought. shaking; tying and tying it; slapping, punching and kicking; Acts of atrocities that the mind cannot tolerate that caused significant physical injuries, along with mental injuries. It must be said unequivocally: this is not the situation in our case – and this conclusion must be expressed in the level of punishment (ibid., at paragraph 4 of her opinion).
This conclusion is certainly correct in the case before us as well (in relation to the main acts of which she was convicted), and this should have an impact in the framework of sentencing the appellant in light of the aforementioned principles of punishment.
- Another consideration that works in favor of the appellant is that in the sentence, she was also charged with compensation in a significant total sum of NIS 180,000, which she paid in full, and which she refrained from appealing (despite the fact that acquittal of a significant part of the charges may justify a reduction in this component of the sentence as well). This proper conduct on the part of the appellant indicates that she is taking responsibility towards the children and parents. This fact, along with the aforementioned in the Probation Service's report in relation to her personal circumstances and her attitude to her wrongful acts, justifies a certain degree of further reduction in the prison sentence imposed on her.
- Against the background of the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that the prison sentence imposed on the appellant should be significantly reduced, and set at 18 months imprisonment. This sentence is also consistent with the customary sentencing policy (see and compare: Criminal Appeal 5986/08 Kahlon v. State of Israel [Nevo] (November 10, 2008) (approval of an 18-month prison sentence for a kindergarten teacher convicted of assault and abuse of a minor); Criminal Appeal 2899/22 Kazakevich v. State of Israel [Nevo] (July 7, 2022) (Confirmation of a sentence of 3.5 years in prison for a kindergarten teacher convicted of assault and abuse of a minor and obstruction of justice, for acts that are more serious than our case). See also: Criminal Case (Beer Sheva District) 64049-04-21 State of Israel v. Ostrovsky [Nevo] (March 14, 2022) (Honorable Judge Yoel Eden) (Imposing a sentence of 24 months in prison on a kindergarten teacher who was convicted as part of a plea bargain of offenses of abuse of a minor and simple assault, in relation to some of the acts that are much more difficult in our case, and in determining the sentence the court took into account the age of the defendant (71 years old) and her health condition); Criminal Case (Hai District) 28622-05-22 State of Israel v. Bo Hamo [Nevo] (January 29, 2024) (The Honorable Judge Erez Porat) (Imposing a sentence of 24 months in prison on a kindergarten teacher for her conviction of a number of violent offenses against toddlers) (an appeal filed by the state against the judgment was deleted at its request in the framework of C.A. 1838/24)[Nevo]; Criminal Case (Jerusalem District) 28621-07-22 State of Israel v. Abu Heikal [Nevo] (July 14, 2025) (Honorable Judge Hannah Miriam Lomp) (Imposing a sentence of 24 months imprisonment on a kindergarten teacher for a large number of violent offenses against minors) (an appeal against the judgment is still pending before this court); Criminal Case ( Tel Aviv District) 41837-08-23 State of Israel v. Malul [Nevo] (October 23, 2025) (The Honorable Judge Maayan Ben Ari) (imposing actual prison sentences of 24, 18 and 12 months on a kindergarten teacher and two assistants, respectively, for committing violent offenses against minors) (appeals filed against the judgments are still pending before this court)).
- It should be noted that although the prison sentence imposed on the appellant should be reduced, as stated, the recommendation of the Probation Service in her case should not be adopted, and a prison sentence to be served by way of community service should not be imposed on her. This level of punishment is inappropriate for the actions of the appellant, who even after partial acceptance of her appeal against the verdict, her conviction for a large number of assault offenses against helpless toddlers will still stand. As is well known, the Probation Service's recommendation is only a recommendation, which, even if in general it should be given considerable weight, the court is not bound by it (see, among many: Criminal Appeal 2048/18 Anonymous v. State of Israel, para. 13 [Nevo] (November 14, 2018); Bukstein, at para. 9; Criminal Appeal Authority 7570/21 Abu Sweilem v. State of Israel, para. 15 [Nevo] (November 11, 2021)). In our case, the appellant's serious acts and the many offenses for which she was convicted (mainly assault); The customary punitive policy , as well as the considerations of deterrence of the public, require the imposition of a punishment that includes a component of imprisonment behind bars.
- In conclusion: In view of the above, I would suggest to my colleagues that we accept the appeal in part, so that we acquit the appellant of some of the offences of which she was convicted, in accordance with what is stated in paragraphs 36-37 above; and that the prison sentence imposed on her is reduced so that it will stand at 18 months behind bars (instead of the 5 years imprisonment imposed on her in the sentence).
| Ofer Grosskopf |