"We will also emphasize the systematic exploitation of the reputation that has been created there "Alperon" by the defendants, which was done in a sophisticated way, Not innocently-32, and while blatantly exploiting the feelings of fear and fears that we had nested in the hearts of the victims about the image created for the Alperon family. To some extent, this is similar to the cases, in which it was determined that the mere presence of known criminals in certain circumstances was sufficient to create an atmosphere of threats and fears (Compare Civil Appeal 632/83, 647/84[1], Ltd.' 259)". (Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 135/89State Israel v.' Alperon P"From 599"III(2) 441)".
- I discussed above the ancestors of the invalidity "The Classics", Among them is the threat of violence, Constantly asking repeated questions to the defendant, Threat or Insinuation of a Threat of Harm to the Defendant, Seduction and Persuasion, and suggestive inquiry. Severny, Because these were fulfilled in our case with regard to the first dubbing to the extent that it exceeded what was required/What is permissible. My words are doubly valid, When we are concerned with a minor who gave his words, which can be seen as - "First Thanksgiving" (According to the accuser's claim), Following the conduct described above (of informants who are also police officers), Even before he was in the status of "Suspect"; This necessitated careful and less aggressive conduct on the part of the informants. Needless to say,, Because, A member of the investigative authority cannot discharge all the duties imposed on him (Especially when it comes to an interrogation exercise that was done in relation to a minor who has not yet been warned) Just because he doesn't wear the blue uniform. Still, In such a situation, In this figure that stands at our doorstep, Extreme caution must be exercised and acted in a manner that does not infringe on the rights of the interrogee, To the extent that it exceeds what is required.
In addition, as appears from the evidence (and contrary to Abergil' s words), it was the informant Abergil who asked the defendant to help him, without this request being preceded by any offer by the defendant for compensation on his behalf (see discussion in this context below).