Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant): I didn't do it at all.
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: What it is not?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant) : It's not me, it's me .. It's nothing, it's just that..
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: What's wrong?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant) : It's not a mistake, it's a mistake ...
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: What is not a mistake? What was the person you had a conflict with?? Tell me that I don't just fall for you?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant) : Anonymous
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: You had an open dispute with him?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant) : Anonymous.
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: So why? Just .. What Happened? He bothered you, what did he do to you??
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant) : Anonymous ... He didn't bother me or
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: So ? So why why ? Oh?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant): What do you call it?? This mistake? Mistake then yes then mistake there is nothing to do it was by mistake.
Tax Spokesperson' 1, The Machine "From" 1: And what did you do with a bullet or something?
Tax Spokesperson' 2, (The Defendant): Anonymous"
(In this context, see Du"8 Dubbing T/140, pp' 4 Lines 5 -22).
- Evident, that the informants continued to develop the conversation with the defendant, When at some point I will'Yale turned to him and asked him to calm down, that the problem can be solved and that, It will be possible to find a way to solve the problem (As for the debt) With the help of the defendant; Then, The second informant said - "Come to meet him" And Aberg'Yale answered, "I'm coming to meet him, no problem.". Bohbot He repeated, "It's a good boy, come to meet him" (Name, pp' 5). Bohbot In his testimony before us, he did not know how to explain why these sentences should have been added on his behalf. But this is evident and conspicuous, Because during that interrogation exercise, there was no relaxed and calm atmosphere between the parties, But if, An atmosphere that taught about a degree of threat and fear, and this is especially true when we are interested in a minor dealing with a second "Criminals" As they wished to introduce themselves to him and according to the picture that had been painted in his eyes, At the same time.
- More, As indicated by the transcription of the dubbing (A/140, pp' 5) Pena Aberg'10 to the defendant when they told him so.: "So if you made a mistake tell me and we will talk differently if he didn't make a mistake with you and you made a mistake it happens but you have to take care of yourself you understand that this is not a game. You didn't go to the grocery store and take ... You made a mistake, Won't help you, You have to take good care of yourself...". Similar, Because the use made by Aberg cannot be overlooked.'In such a powerful language that radiates measure, Not negligible, of aggression and even a threat to the defendant. Moreover, The questioner will ask - What is the meaning and purpose of using the term as : "Fall on you".
- The defendant's testimony in this context, As quoted above, But it confirms the conclusion that teaches about the dubbing of trees to the extent that it included the use of names, Tools, and problematic measures (Such as; Body Composition, Tattoos, Name of a crime family, Words that radiated forcefulness while leading and navigating the defendant's words in a certain direction). The aforementioned encounter instilled fear and fear in the defendant's heart that evil might happen to him. The informants instilled in the defendant the understanding that they considered him responsible for the death of the deceased and that the more this result, that caused them damage, Originated by mistake on the part of the defendant, After all, his situation will be better. Kerry, "The Informants" Created anticipation in the defendant, According to her - If it turns out, Because this is an act that originated in a mistake, Then, His condition will be easier. Yes, In such a situation, They will consider him and come to meet him. Moreover, The defendant said during the dubbing (As mentioned, It was done before he even knew that he was a suspect in the murder and therefore has not yet been warned): "I didn't do it at all."; and - "It's not me, it's me .. It's nothing, it's just that.". Then, After the informant tried again to ask if this was done by mistake, The defendant said again - " It's not a mistake, it's a mistake ...". Even after the informant continued his attempt to extract from the defendant a statement according to which, He did so by mistake by telling the defendant - " What is not a mistake? What was the person you had a conflict with?? Tell me that I don't just fall for you?, Even then, The defendant continued to adhere to his version in his reply to the informant: "Anonymous". Yes, The defendant answered in the negative to the question of whether he had a dispute with the deceased, He even answered in the negative to the informant's question whether the deceased had harassed him in the past. In the end, After the informant insisted on reusing the word "mistake", The defendant answered him in the following language: "What do you call it?? This mistake? Mistake then yes then mistake there is nothing to do it was by mistake ". To the informant's question - "What did you do with a ball or something?", The defendant replied "Anonymous".
- Admittedly, The informant tried to explain and justify the repeated use of the word "Mistake" Throughout the dubbing exercise. At the same time, Similar, Because it would have been better, If the informant had not used this word frequently, Repeated, while creating a hostile and threatening atmosphere. These words are all the more valid in light of the fact that, Because the use of the word "Mistake" Done many times throughout the act of dubbing. Yes, In this context, Consideration should also be given to the preferred option that the informant created for the defendant, When, A situation was created whereby - On the one hand, If the defendant chooses to take the preferred route of the"Mistake" Then his situation will be better and the informant will not "Will fall on him". On the other hand, If he chooses to follow the other outline, Kerry - An act that does not originate in "Mistake", Then, His condition deteriorates. I want to say, In this conduct of the informant, It is indeed, An opening for the defendant (The minor) One door that leads to a certain outline, Preferred and enlightened that is concerned with the"Mistake". But, This, He did while closing (Even if only partially, But to a considerable extent) the doors of the other tracks and while clarifying, Because walking on other routes (For example; of an act that was not done by mistake) Involves difficulties and bumps. Yes, The informants created, In their conduct, An atmosphere that does not allow for the expression of a neutral position, Independent and free from considerations that cannot be ruled out, Because their origin is fear and/Or fear of the informants, and the fact is that, Because at the end of the conversation with the informant, the defendant expressed himself in a way that made it clear, Because he chooses the option of the "Mistake" As the informant "Call it": "What do you call it?? This mistake? Mistake then yes then mistake there is nothing to do it was by mistake ". And again; The fact is, Because the informant clarified things to the defendant by stating - If this is done by mistake then, " Tell me and we'll talk", Otherwise - "If he didn't make a mistake with you and you made a mistake, it happens, but you have to protect yourself, you understand that it's not a game.. You didn't go to the grocery store and take ... You made a mistake, Won't help you, You have to take good care of yourself..." . Given the above,, The defendant's explanations cannot be completely ruled out, According to them, - He hung on the word "Mistake" As a way out of the impasse in which it finds itself, Standing alone in front of another "Criminals" Supposedly, As he thought at the time. Hence, He chose the least bad option for him.
- And more, About the use of the name of a crime family and the fear it creates in a person's feelings, See, for example, the two judgments to which he referred in"The Defendant, As part of his summaries. In the matter of a certain (Criminal Case 39696-01-14 Here"30), Determined, Among other things, Because: "...The atmosphere created, Taking advantage of the balance of power between senior criminals connected to Domrani, Those who"They have respect" and that in other circumstances there were "Fines him in- 200,000 ₪", and the minors, Violated the minors' freedom of choice to protect their right from self-incrimination" (Name, pp' 51, Lines 10 -14).
See also Miscellaneous Criminal Applications Alperon Here"In the framework of it, the following were quoted: