However, the court ruled that the violation of the appellant's rights, first and foremost the severe violation of the right to counsel, leads to the invalidation of the appellant's confession by virtue of the doctrine of judicial invalidation.
In view of the severity of the violation of the appellant's right to counsel during the interrogation, and since the violation of this right had an impact on the receipt and content of the confession to the informant, the court ordered the disqualification of the evidence, in order to prevent a material and disproportionate violation of the appellant's right to a fair trial, as well as a violation of the fairness of the criminal proceeding.
The Honorable Judge A. Shoham wrote the main ruling in the Haibtov case, which was joined by the two judges of the panel. The Honorable Justice Barak Erez, in her own decision, sought to add that alongside the violation of the right to counsel, drugs were used in the detention cell.It amounts to an independent defect that is no less powerful than the violation of the right to counsel. Each of these aspects casts a "shadow" over the appellant's confession to the informant, and the joining of the shadows creates a great darkness that makes it impossible to rely on the confession for the purpose of conviction." (See paragraph 2 of her opinion). According to the Honorable Justice Shem, a confession made close to the consumption of drugs is accompanied by an inherent fear that the suspect did not confess freely and voluntarily, and raises doubts as to the truth of the matter (ibid., paragraph 6 of her opinion). It follows that, in the opinion of the Honorable Justice Barak-Erez, there is room to invalidate the confession by virtue of Article 12 to the Evidence Ordinance.
Given the above, the appellant was acquitted after serving a sentence of about 11 years in prison. The indictment was filed against him in 2007 and on 28 April 2011 he was convicted in the District Court. The judgment in the appeal was given on August 2, 2018, in the framework of which, as stated, he was acquitted of the offenses of murder and robbery. It should be noted that, the name of the confession to the informant came a few days later.