Conclusion of this chapter
- In the margins of my remarks regarding this chapter, I find it appropriate to note, Because the testimony of the defendant before us, During which his version was heard for the first time, It is not free of doubts and has not left such a reliable and reliable impression (I will discuss this later). At the same time, A distinction must be made between the defendant's statements regarding the occurrence of the events and his statements regarding the conduct of the investigation. Yes, The flaws in the investigation can be learned from the evidentiary material that was presented to us, Including the recorded interrogations.
- Against the background of the facts regarding the first dubbing, As extensively reviewed above, Similar, Because the fact of the accumulation of quite a few defects, leads to the conclusion regarding the inadmissibility of the beginning of this confession, Both according to the legislative track and according to the case law track. Not only that., As will be explained later, Where the defendant's words during the first dubbing (which in the eyes of the accuser are "First Thanksgiving"), They did not ripen when the time came. (As part of the second dub) into a confession and a version that can live under the roof of the events as they are; It will be very difficult to adopt the first link in the chain of this version that does not correspond to the essential part of the facts and/or the prepared details. Add to this, Even if I had accepted the accuser's version according to it - The defendant's statements to the informants included a reference to the fact, Because the murder was committed using a knife, Still, Even then, There is nothing in this statement, per se, To teach, A little bit, The defendant's knowledge of prepared details relating to the occurrence of the subject matter of the proceedings herein. As I will discuss later, I was convinced, that the defendant's version according to which, He was exposed to an article on the website- ynet From which arises, that the defendant's death was caused by stabbings, It is reasonable and should not be ruled out (See - A/102 And the content of the comments there). Moreover, Also the witness to' Power, She noted in her testimony (See - Her words above), that the police informed her as part of the investigation, Because the deceased was stabbed; Hence, The option should not be ruled out, Because some details from the investigation were leaked out. Yes, Witness 30' She herself testified in her statement, Because she was exposed to an article detailing the course of the murder. Needless to say,, Because, The defendant's version cannot be ruled out, According to her - In the long period of time that elapsed between the murder and his arrest and/Or his words to the informants, "All of Afula" Knew the details of the incident. Damping, The defendant's words should not be regarded as (If said or implied), According to them, - We are interested in the act of stabbing, As things that complicate him with the knowledge of prepared details. Starting from the moment the article is published, the subject of the article/102 (And after it was clarified, Because the investigators themselves spoke before one of the witnesses (30'), Because we are concerned with an incident that originated in the stabbing and the passage of a lot of time from the moment the incident happened until the moment the defendant made his statement to the informants) No more to be said, Because this detail (Kerry- The fact that the deceased was stabbed) We are among the prepared details.
the course of the investigation after dubbing; The first day of interrogation
- After the first dubbing that took place in the middle of the city of Afula, And after evaluating-Telephone situation made by the investigation team (Testimony of Ben Lulu, pp' 99 For the record, Row 4), It was decided to arrest the defendant. Up Next , And according to the testimony of Ben Lulu:
"...The suspect was rushed to the Afula station, at the Afula station he was interrogated in an initial interrogation at the office after of course he consulted with Attorney Zohar Arbel and he was given all the rights that the suspect deserves, and in the course of that interrogation we noticed that the suspect spoke little or did not speak at all, and we thought that maybe he would be more comfortable talking outside, so I put a recording device on my body and took it out of the recorded room to a certain place in the station. And there I interrogated him for an interrogation that I think lasted about an hour, and what stood out there in the interrogation was that he said I was at home at the time of the murder, that is, here we have already received a very clear alibi refutation that says that he was not at home when the police were at the scene of the murder, and when I ask him about his movements on the night of the murder he says I was at home all night it was clear to me that he was lying. Later in the program we led him to the station in Hadera, where informants were waiting for him...(p. 99 of the transcript, lines 6-16).
- The defendant was first interrogated by Investigator G'Haad Abu Salah (who was part of the special investigation team that was established for the purpose of solving the murder case). In the same investigation from 28.2.26 1 hour 17:30, Also Participated"in Said Suleiman and youth researcher Mirza Abzakh (See - A/77), When this investigation was documented and marked as- 238/16. Yes, In the same context, Except for the message that is the subject of/77, The exhibits were submitted to the court: A/78 - Duo"H.M."T; A/79 - Investigation Disc/80 - Transcript of the interrogation.
- The defendant was legally warned, He was explained his rights and was even given the right to consult with a lawyer before his interrogation. The defendant was charged with premeditated causing death and drug trafficking. In his response, the defendant argued as follows:: "In the past, I was interrogated in the"R. North also talked about drug trafficking and the interrogators did all kinds of tricks and tactics on me and brought me to a situation where I admit things I didn't do, In addition to all this, I don't trust the police for a very simple reason that I saw on TV about Zadorov's murder and other cases, and from then on I maintain my right to remain silent" (A/77, Lines 10 -12). Up Next, Good news 16 Answer: "I'm innocent". From that point onwards, Throughout his interrogation, The defendant maintained his right to remain silent and did not answer the questions addressed to him.
Investigator C'Haad Abu Salah, At the time, he served as an investigator in the investigation team, And this is what he testified: