I will summarize the picture that emerges from the evidence in relation to the paper clipping and discuss its evidentiary significance. Thus, in the compartment of the Mazda driver's door, the vehicle that has been used by the defendant continuously for weeks, if not months, was found with the replica license plate number of the Toyota, the vehicle used by the deceased's murderers on the day of the murder. Moreover, not only was the document seized in the defendant's car, but it was seized in a natural storage place used by the driver of the vehicle, as opposed to occasional passengers, and in the possession of many other documents, all of which belonged to the defendant. Indeed, it is not possible to determine with absolute certainty that the vehicle number on the paper clipping was written in the defendant's own handwriting, in view of the limited scope of the registration, the scarcity of characteristics for examination, and the defendant's refusal to provide samples of dictated manuscripts. However, the possibility that this is indeed the defendant's handwriting is certainly plausible in view of the findings of the opinion, the absence of findings that negate compatibility, the suspicious unwillingness to provide handwritten samples, and the suppressed version that remains unsupported that it is the handwriting of Sabri (peace be upon him).
Because of the caution that is required, I will refrain from making any conclusions on the issue of the origin of the manuscript, but not the main thing. It is sufficient that the paper clipping can be attributed to the defendant, and this is established by the set of circumstantial evidence detailed above in a convincing and solid manner, in order for it to establish weighty evidence for his duty. It should be emphasized, in this context, that in contrast to other evidence, which links the defendant to Mitsubishi only, the paper clipping creates a direct and independent connection between the defendant and the Toyota, the other vehicle used to commit the murder, and this is evidence found in the vehicle in the defendant's personal use and which ostensibly has nothing to do with the murder operation. The location of the paper clipping in this place, along with the rest of the defendant's documents, in the absence of any convincing alternative explanation, establishes another significant layer in the body of circumstantial evidence for the defendant's obligation, and links it directly to the executing vehicle and the duplicate license plate that he had on that day.