The existence of a motive - protracted and violent family conflict
As is well known, the existence of a motive is not one of the foundations of the offenses of which the defendant is accused, but the proof of the existence of a motive may constitute additional circumstantial evidence to prove the commission of the offenses, as part of the totality of the accuser's evidence [C.A. (Supreme) 52545-08-24 Ashiwi v. Israel (December 17, 2025); Criminal Appeal 2050/21 Al-Hawashla v. M.I . (16.05.23); Criminal Appeal 728/84 Hermon v. Israel (July 19, 1987), para. 7]. In the present case, according to the indictment, the background and motive for the deceased's murder was an ongoing bloody dispute between members of the Musrati family, the defendant's family and their associates, and members of the Al-Awah family and their associates, a dispute that led to victims from both families. I will examine the evidence regarding the existence of the dispute and the connection between it and the defendant's actions.
The first and central element in proving the dispute is provided by a memorandum drawn up on October 12, 2022 by Commander Omri Grady of the Homicide Division of the District Attorney's Office. The memorandum reviews 9 incidents of murder or severe violence, which took place over the course of about a year and a half, between October 2020 and May 2022, in which the rival parties included members of the Musrati family and their associates on the one hand, and members of the Al-Wahwah and Jarushi families on the other. On the basis of this database and on the basis of his experience, Commander Grady states that "there is an ongoing bloody dispute between the Musrati family and the families of Al-Wahwah, and it is clear that both sides are constantly engaged in intentions to harm and arm themselves in order to harm the other side" [P/136]. The memorandum was submitted with consent and the defense did not ask to question Commander Grady about what was stated in it.
In addition, two members of the defendant's family, who appeared to testify on behalf of the defense, testified explicitly that there was a long-term dispute between the Musrati family and the Al-Wahwah family. This is the testimony of 'Abd al-Hadi Musrati, the defendant's cousin, who confirmed in his testimony that the dispute existed between the two families [transcript of December 4, 2024, p. 240] and the testimony of the defendant's uncle, Ahmad Musrati, who confirmed in the cross-examination that he was in conflict with the families of al-Wahwach and Jarushi [transcript of February 19, 2025, at p. 269]. In fact, all the circumstances surrounding the testimonies of the defense witnesses attest to the existence of the conflict and its intensity, since most of the witnesses testified, with the consent of the parties, through a visual conference from Georgia, after they left the country due to the threat to their lives. For example, Shaker, the defendant's father, said that three of his five children were murdered, as well as her grandson and nephew, and that he was in Georgia due to threats to his life [transcript of December 4, 2024, at pp. 179, 182]. Similar statements were made by Cousin Udai, who told us that his brother had been murdered and that he and his family were threatened, and therefore could not return to Israel [ibid., pp. 202-203, 223-224].