Here it is., The defendant was brought into the cell just before 10 p.m. when Barry, Because this specific investigative proceeding, It will not come to an end before the hour 22:00. In this context, Instructions didn't go unnoticed Section 9th of the Youth Law. At the same time, I think, Because conducting this interrogation exercise, At the time when it is actually done, It does not contradict the provisions of the above section"30. {See - In the same context, the testimony of Hodaya Amsalem, There, she noted that she did not remember any of the interrogators asking her to sign a reference for the interrogation of a minor after 10 p.m., and she personally did not sign such a document (pp' 217 For the minutes of the 29.3.17)}. Witness Amsalem knew how to point out, Because she knows, Interrogation of a minor is permitted until 10 p.m.. She also added an explanation on her behalf regarding the absence of such a document, noting, There was no frontal interrogation at night (pp' 217 For the record, Row 30) And later on., She did not know whether there was a difference between a frontal interrogation and the activity of informants for the purpose of authorizing a night interrogation (pp' 218 For the record, Lines 10 -12), And so she noted there:
"Q: Absolutely fine, And as far as you're concerned, if the interrogation is not a frontal interrogation but an informant activity in the cell, then you don't need permission for a night interrogation?
A: I don't know.".
This is the language of Section 9th of the Youth Law:
"A suspected minor shall not be interrogated at the police station at night, as defined in section 9d(a), but an authorized officer may order, by a reasoned written decision, that a suspected minor be interrogated at night for one of the following:
(1) The offense he is suspected of committing was committed close to the date of the minor's detention or arrest;
(2) The offense he is suspected of committing is a felony-type offense, or an offense of the misdemeanor type listed in the Addendum, and the authorized officer is convinced that the postponement of the investigation may lead to one of the cases listed in the section 9h(III)(2);