In his testimony in court, Uriel reiterated that the jacket seized in the room of the defendant and Uriel was indeed a jacket that belonged to him (page 74 of the transcript of the hearing of December 22, 2024, lines 6, 8). However, Uriel retracted his identification of the jacket in the security camera footage, claiming that the size of the jacket did not match the defendant's size, and denied that he had identified the jacket during his interrogation with the police, and in his own words: "... I told the police, the interrogator, I told them that there was no way that this hoodie was mine. At first I said yes, that it was mine, because I have such a hoodie, but then I told him that it couldn't be mine, because he couldn't be wearing my hoodie, because it's really small, it's short, it's extra small. I don't know... He wears wide. Extra large, at least I think. So. At that time, it seemed that everything was wide for him" (page 70 of the minutes of the hearing of December 22, 2024, lines 7-10, 16).
- As I expanded on above, the characteristics of this jacket - dark color, hoodie, and a V-pattern across the chest - correspond, in general terms, to the characteristics of the jacket worn by the man documented in the security camera footage. Therefore, even without the jacket being identified by Uriel in the videos, there is a considerable probability that the jacket that was seized in the defendant's room nearby after the Molotov cocktail throwing was the jacket documented in the security camera footage. Considering the fact that the jacket was identified by Uriel as belonging to him, and which was seized in the defendant's room in the vicinity after the events, this also strengthens the impression that the defendant was involved in these acts.
- On 8 November 2023, a laundry basket was also seized in the defendant's room in the yeshiva, with several empty beer bottles containing cloth wrapped in clothing that was located under the defendant's bed (seizure report and marking P/42, photo 4).
This is consistent with findings found at the various scenes of the incidents, from which it can be learned that the Molotov cocktails used were glass bottles, in which cloth and gasoline were inserted. Thus, at the scene of Sheikh Jarrah, "a glass bottle of green color was seized, its mouth was sooty and the smell of flammable substance was emitted from the bottle" (summary report of the forensic investigation, P/48, and a photograph of a Heiniken beer bottle - P/48). A laboratory examination found remnants of gasoline in this bottle (forensic laboratory opinion of October 25, 2023, P/74, at p. 3). At the post office's scene, glass fragments of a green bottle were found on the floor, next to the post office, as well as the remains of burnt yellow cloth on the floor (Forensic investigation summary report P/55; exhibit seizure report P/56). Remnants of gasoline were found in these exhibits (Forensic Laboratory Opinion of 25 October 2023 - P/74, at pp. 3-4). At the Bank Leumi arena - at the entrance to the Bank Leumi branch building in Shabbat Square, a dark green glass bottle was found with a cloth rag inside (supplementary form to exhibits P/32, as well as a summary report of the forensic investigation P/59; reports of seizure of exhibits P/60 - P/61). Remnants of gasoline were found in these exhibits (Forensic Laboratory Opinion of 31 October 2023 - P/73, at pp. 3-5).
- The seizure of the backpack, jacket and basket with the beer bottles while sitting, combined with the version given by Uriel, the defendant's roommate, about the background to the location of the backpack, the gasoline remnants found in the backpack, the correspondence between the characteristics of the jacket and the backpack and the documentation in the security camera footage, and the fact that in practice glass bottles containing cloth were used to carry out the acts at the various scenes - all of these lead to the conclusion that there is a high probability that these are indeed items that were used to carry out the acts. This, too, is capable of tying the defendant to the commission of the acts.
Comparison of the videos against the background of the identification of the defendant and the findings seized
- A comparison between the man identified as the defendant in these video clips and the character documented in the other clips in question, as well as between the character documented in the other videos - the postal video, the Mercantile video, and the court video, leads to the conclusion that this is the same character, and that the character documented in all the videos is indeed the image of the defendant. This is done with the utmost caution that requires the use of the court's eyesight and impression, and given that this is not an impression that requires expertise (Criminal Appeal 2076/21 Almajid Marwan Waked v. State of Israel, para. 28 (July 30, 2023));Criminal Appeal 3162/17 Zaitsev v. State of Israel, para. 11 (October 19, 2017); Criminal Appeal 4204/07 Suissa v. State of Israel, para. 10 (October 23, 2008); Criminal Appeal 602/06 Avraham v. State of Israel, para. 4 (January 22, 2007)).
This conclusion is based on a direct impression of the similarity of the external features of all the characters in the videos, after watching these videos over and over again. In some of the video clips, it can be clearly seen that this is a man with a rounded and bearded face, similar to the face of the accused. It is also possible to get an impression of the body type of the man in question, which is similar to the body type of the defendant - healthy - not burned and not full.
- In many segments of each of the videos, it can be seen that it is a jacket with a V-shaped front across the chest (see, among other things, the video of Sheikh Jarrah - 03:27:17, 03:44, 03:41:46; in the postal video - at 03:56; in the video Bank Leumi - at 03:53:22; in the video of Mercantile Bank - at 04:06:21; in the video of the court - at 04:43).
In addition, in all the videos, the character carries a backpack, with two reflective white zippers at the top of the front of the bag and a white reflective caption on the bottom, and this too can be seen in the sections of all the videos (in some of the clips, due to the angle of the shooting and the distance from the camera, only one white zipper can be seen. In some of the videos, you can clearly see two zippers. See the video of Shih Jarrah - at 03:45:24; In the postal video - 03:55; in the video Bank Leumi - at 03:56:07; in the video of Mercantile Bank - at 03:56:05; in the video Court - at 03:41:57, 04:47).