A: What's wrong with that?? I didn't understand?
- What does he have to answer everything Nissim asks him?
A: But he still has the right to answer or not to answer.
Q: Did you give him this right? Until now you gave him this right when he said I have nothing to tell you?"
(pp' 297 Detail', Lines 30-23).
- Lasri was also asked to address his words during the dubbing when he approached the defendant by telling him: "Now I'm asking you again, You will explain to me in the best way I can understand and that I will be calm at night, OK? So that we can both be calm at night". Lasri replied, For there is no threat in his words. According to him, When he plays the role of a criminal, Then he must demonstrate concern about the possibility of the presence of a police officer or an informant inside the cell. Hence, The Trial Comes "That I will be calm at night... That we would both be relaxed at night")pp' 299 Detail', Lines 18-10). Lasri explained, Q"A man is someone who is not a cop, One that is not dubbed. As far as I'm concerned, inside the cell. It's said in the clearest way possible." (pp' 302 Detail', Row 4).
- As for the number of stabbings, Lasri clarified that his job was to get a version from the defendant and added that, "If it makes sense" (pp' 302 Detail' Row 24). In his eyes, the version of 14 The stabbing did not sound logical and therefore he continued to interrogate and question the defendant regarding this issue. When asked why he thought so,, Reply, Because the moment a person thinks it's someone else and discovers that it's not the same person he wanted to hurt, So from the point of view of thought it doesn't work out (pp' 304 Detail', Lines 20-15).
- Please note, Because the informant is Lasri, He knew that the dubbing was not filmed, But recorded. (pp' 305 Detail', Row 26 and- 30). Needless to say,, Because it is not clear why this fact should have been known to the informants. Yes, This fact shows, Because the absence of visual documentation, was known to the investigating authorities, and despite this, Ignore it.
- Here is the place to note, that the informant was also interrogated regarding the scope of the information that was conveyed to the informants as part of the briefing, Such as; Details about the deceased, Details about the location and number of stabbings and more. The informant claimed that he had not received any information. The learned defense attorney tried to confront him with what he said during the dubbing, indicating that he did know more details. For example,, When the defendant said, Because it's- 14 Stabbing, The informants continued to interrogate him in this matter and did not let him go. The informant claimed that the reason for this lies in the logic behind the story and not for any other reason. (See - pp' 310, Lines 15-10).
In the same context, the defense attorney also addressed questions that arose during the dubbing and related to details about the deceased and his physique., During the dubbing, it was said that we were interested in the deceased, who is about fifty years old and has a large physique (See - e.g.' 312, Lines 26-21).
- The second informant, Vanunu, was also questioned at length about the dubbing and its course. First, He referred to the defendant's behavior as soon as he entered the detention cell. According to him: "It can be noted there that at the beginning it was also the same guy who arrived, Arrived quite rubbed, Let's call it that. He started talking as well, In criminal language, He started talking a little about his bags, On the conduct of my Hebrew, On plates, Showed quite great proficiency relative to the minor inside the cell. And then there was also a criminal, Spoke in a whisper when he needed to speak, Concepts, What to do, When to do". (pp' 315 For the record, Lines 7-3).
Up Next, Vanunu replied as follows:: "He wasn't scared at all, From the beginning. Even when he spoke to us, his speech was, He came and sat down., And he behaved in a calm manner, he was quite calm. He also spoke in a language as if he knew the world. That he wanted to talk to me about the offense itself, ... I'm scared, I can't tell you that there was" (pp' 315 Detail', Lines 18-12).
- During the cross-examination, Witness Vanunu was asked, If he closed his heart to the right of silence granted to the defendant and how it was expressed during the dubbing. To understand the informant, You can get an impression of the course of events, that the defendant cooperated with the informants , He answered questions and conducted a long dialogue during which he told about criminal events and even gave details about his family and friends (pp' 318 For Transcript Lines 14-8).
- And more, Questions were directed to the witness regarding the invalid ancestors, Whether these are known to him or if, In his opinion, They were used during dubbing. He was also asked about the reason behind what he told the defendant, Such as; The Matter of Being, Supposedly, Stopping the Relationship"30, The name Nissim Vanunu from Tel Aviv and the witness's description of the cell as a cell of mules and more. (See - pp' 320 For the record).
- In his answers to this, The witness noted, Because that's what came to his mind, and that there was nothing specific that led him to say what the defense attorney referred to (See - pp' 322 For the record).
- The witness noted, Because at the beginning of the conversation with the defendant, He asked him a number of questions and the defendant began to talk about an offense related to drugs and even demonstrated full proficiency in this field. The informant played the character of a criminal, and as he noted in his testimony, He acted as an active informant in the investigation of this case. (pp' 325 For the record, Row 15).
- More, The witness was asked why he had to use insults and vulgar words, and whether such use does not apply to the ancestors of the invalid, Especially in light of the fact that he is a minor. The informant gave his explanations as to his use of the phrases and words to which the defense referred, The need to play a criminal character. Yes, The informant confronts the claim, According to her - Already in the early stages of dubbing, he addressed the defendant in criminal language, Even before the defendant even spoke in any criminal jargon and had not yet begun to cooperate with the informants (pp' 328 For the record, Lines 26 - 31).
- This witness also noted, Because, In relation to the act of dubbing, There was no time limit (pp' 331 For the record, Row 3).
- In terms of the body type of the informant; Vanunu noted, Because he has a significantly taller physique than the defendant (pp' 331, Row 28).
- The informant is confronted with all the stages of dubbing and the course of events as expressed in the act of dubbing. Among other things, The informant was asked to give his opinion to the attitude that the informants projected towards the defendant even when they asked him to raise his head and when they told him - "Who's Asking You"; This was immediately after he asked them to leave him alone. It should be emphasized, The informant did not see anything wrong with this (pp' 333 For the record, Lines 6-1). The witness tried to explain it this way: "... I am generally suspicious of him, I want to know who he is. I want to say who is the guy in front of me. That's the whole point of all these questions and behavior., Shelly, it doesn't make sense why they brought you to me.. That's the way it is." (pp' 333 For the record, Lines 22-20).
Yes, At some point during the dub call, The informant turned to the defendant, stating that "So that I will be calm at night". In this context as well, When the informant was asked to respond to that statement, He noted, Because there is nothing wrong with that..
- One of the questions, As directed on behalf of the"20 The defendant to the informant, was in this version;
"Yes, Look, By the way, when we talk about this, and the Honorable Justice Dabour also asked this question, He told you to look again this time, A sequence of questions changes the answer. I mean, he gives you, It aligns the line, The Honorable Justice Hellman also said this. It aligns the line. And I'll say the following, 18 Minutes, I did a mathematical calculation here. 18 All in all, it took him minutes to express his objection, What pressure is applied and it aligns the line... And after 18 Minutes a child comes and tells you about his involvement in a murder case. You know, Bells, The bells don't ring for you that maybe your aggressive behavior has led to the fact that now you're going to send an innocent child for many years ?..."