Moreover, the defendant's involvement in the prior planning of the murder, in its execution and in the actions intended to prevent the perpetrators from being exposed, did not begin or end on the day of the murder. As explained above, it was the defendant who located the details of the identification plate, which was duplicated and installed on the Mitsubishi on the day of the murder, about three weeks before the murder. The defendant is also the person who actually conducted the activity on the day of the arrest, which was intended to keep the Mitsubishi away from the watchful eyes of the police, since he was the one who ordered the tow truck to the scene and it was he who brought Abed in his car to the parking lot of the Mitsubishi, assisted in replacing the license plates and worked to load the Mitsubishi onto the tow truck. And it wasn't just the Mitsubishi that the defendant was tied to, for in his own car and among his documents, the paper clipping was seized with the number of the replica license plate of the Toyota, the vehicle from which the assassins got out. The evidence therefore testifies that the defendant took a real part in the planning and preparatory activities that preceded the day of the murder, served as a leading, dominant and controlling figure on the day of the murder itself, and even after the murder he acted to obscure the traces of the murderers and to conceal the evidence.
The learned defense attorneys argue in their summaries that no direct evidence was brought to testify to the defendant's knowledge, as someone who was in Mitsubishi, of the intention of the Toyota occupants to harm the deceased, let alone to murder him in life. True, such direct evidence was not brought, just as no direct evidence was brought of the defendant's presence in Mitsubishi, but the circumstantial evidence that was brought clearly proves not only the defendant's knowledge of the intention to kill, but also that he was a full accomplice to this intention. As stated, the defendant took part in the preparations and planning, and at the latest on the morning of the murder he was aware of the acquisition of the two stolen vehicles, the installation of the forged license plates, the acquisition of operational telephones, and the joint planned activity towards the deceased. He was also aware of the deceased's place of residence, his place of work, his daily routine, and of course the long-term bloody conflict between the two families.