The impact on Uriel's identification in his police interrogation can be seen in the transcript of Uriel's interrogation, which shows that the defendant's name was raised even before he was identified by Uriel. Before Uriel was shown the security camera footage, Uriel was asked about the identity of his roommates and named the defendant as one of his accomplices. Uriel was even asked if he had any idea why he was asked to testify and replied that he had heard "that there is a video of someone burning things and that's it" (P/50, lines 7, 9). The mention of the defendant, as well as Uriel's knowledge of the existence of a video of someone burning things, confirm the impression that there was a guiding dialogue between Uriel and the investigators prior to the defendant's identification.
- Idan also claimed in his testimony in court that when he began to watch the videos, he was aware that the defendant and Shimon were being searched, and that he was supposed to identify the defendant, as follows (in response to the question: "... I understand that when you started watching the videos, did you understand that they were looking for Haim and Shimon, right?"): "Yes", and yes (in response to the question: "There was no situation in which they told you to listen, we don't know if there is someone here you know or someone you don't know, come and see, they told you to listen, do you have to find Haim?"): "Haim and Shimon, yes" (p. 171 of the minutes of the hearing of July 9, 2025, Lines 14, 19, 24).
Indeed, the transcript of Idan's interrogation shows that even before Idan identified the defendant, he was asked about his acquaintance with the defendant and said that the defendant had been arrested (P/79A, p. 4, lines 85, 87-88; p. 5, line 104). Moreover, in a lengthy conversation that took place with Idan prior to his identification, he was told about things that the defendant and Shimon had done. From the investigator's words, it was even possible to get the impression that the presentation of the videos was intended to show Idan what the charges against the defendant and Shimon were. Thus, when Idan asked the interrogator, "What did they do?" the interrogator replied, "I'll show you now" (P/79A, p. 9, lines 231-232), when shortly afterwards Idan was shown one of the videos and was told: "I'll show you everything, I'll stop with you in the segments, tell me what you are... See if you recognize" (P/79A, p. 10, lines 250-251). Hence, in Idan's case, too, there was a guiding discourse prior to the identification of the defendant.
- Rinat testified that even before the police arrived at her, she was told by the police that the defendant's calls to her had been identified on her mobile phone. In light of this, she confirmed that she knew, even before the videos were shown to her, that the police wanted her to see whether the defendant was documented in these videos, and in her words (in response to the question: "In other words, you clearly knew, before you saw any video, that the police wanted, or requested, that you should see whether in the footage, if Haim Abramson appears in the videos, correctly?"): "Yes" (p. 117 of the minutes of the hearing of March 20, 2025, line 33). From the transcript of Rinat's interrogation, it can be seen that the documentation of the interrogation began only in the middle of it, so that the existence of such a preliminary discourse cannot be ruled out (see the transcript of her interrogation, P/78A, p. 1, lines 17 onwards).
In this regard, I will also refer to the testimony of Policeman Ofir Levy, one of the two interrogators who interrogated Rinat, who confirmed in his interrogation in court that Rinat had assessed, even before the beginning of her interrogation, what matter the interrogators had come to her, and in his words: "... So when we were still talking to her, I don't remember if it was Dudu or me, and we made an appointment with her, I think she knew what it was about as soon as we said, when we got there she already said, as if she had nothing to do with the police, she doesn't live in Jerusalem either, they talk to them from the Jerusalem police", and (in response to the question: "... When you came to her, did she know it was Abramson, in short?"): "If I'm not mistaken, she said, yes, she also said that she was receiving letters from him as if she were a store" (p. 51 of the transcript of the hearing of October 13, 2024, lines 1-4, 6). Therefore, we must also take into account this preliminary discourse between Rinat and her interrogators in the background of Rinat's identification of the defendant.