Witness, Mr. Ben Lulu: Sometimes they don't have both the head of an investigation team and senior investigators, there's a problem with the very language, sometimes things are emitted and that's what I'm sorry about, and another thing, even if one statement or another was made, and it was said, there's a transcript, it wasn't done with the aim of insulting, teasing and frightening, it was verbal and stressful, rest assured that this was the way it was ."
(p. 151, lines 26-31).
- In this context, the words of the Supreme Court in the Shemesh case are beautiful, Additional Criminal Hearing 5852/10 State of Israel v. Shemesh [Published in Nevo] (09 January 2012), in paragraph 136:
"Even if the purpose of criminal law is to bring the guilty to justice, this purpose should not be sought to be realized at any cost, and certainly not at the cost of violating the basic principles of our legal system. A democratic state that has also engraved on its banner the need to protect the rights of the suspect and the accused to a fair trial is not entitled to accept interrogation methods designed to circumvent the right of the suspect and the accused to a fair trial and to empty them of real content. In this context, it is appropriate to refer to the words of President A. Barak in the case of the High Court of Justice 5100/94 Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. Government of Israel, IsrSC 55(4) 817 (1999), according to which:
"In formulating the rules of investigation, two values or interests clash. On the one hand, the desire to expose the truth, and thus fulfill the public's interest in detecting and preventing offenses. On the other hand, the desire to protect the human dignity and liberty of the interrogee... A democratic, freedom-loving society is not willing for investigators to use all means to uncover the truth. '..."
On the "reasonable doubt"
- When we are dealing with a criminal proceeding, we are ordered to examine whether the defendant's guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt; This is by virtue of the Section 3422(a) to the Penal Law, which instructs us in this language: "A person shall not be held criminally liable for an offense unless it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt".
- The basic principles of our system state that a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty;
״There is no conviction unless all reasonable doubts have been removed. If there is reasonable doubt, there are no convicts, since it is better for a criminal to be acquitted than for a person to be convicted even though there remains a reasonable doubt of his guilt, since a different approach can lead to the conviction of an innocent person" (see Crim. Appeal 347/88 Demjanjuk v. State of Israel, Piskei Din 47(4) 221, 644-645 (1993) (hereinafter: the Demjanjuk case)).