It should be noted that the aforementioned time difference is also reflected in the observation reports compiled by Roy Weinberger, reports in which he recorded "real time" alongside the cameras' documentation, when it is clear that two cameras documented the same route at a certain time interval (p. 10 Bat/67 and p. 8 Bat/67a). The "Dalia Young North" camera documented the Chevrolet swerving off the main road at 07:00:36, while the exact same footage exists on the "Dalia Young South" camera at 07:00:44. He was also not asked in his testimony about the time difference between the cameras.
As to the claims regarding the exact location where the shoes were found, in accordance with A/138, the investigator Armann checked certain coordinates (points) from Ituran's data output, and marked them on a map or ID. On page 3, which details the map numbers recorded in the Ituran system between 06:59 and 07:03, it can be seen that this is an area where the Chevrolet was recorded by the security cameras during a drive (Stockholm Street and the deviation from it) and that there is vegetation (trees) in the area where the shoes were found. If so, the Chevrolet was even on Stockholm Street, and on the inner street in the area where the shoes were found. Whether it was at 07:00 or 07:01, the fact is that the shoes were found a few days later in the very same area where the Chevrolet car passed. Indeed, it is not possible to determine the exact time (at the second level) when the shoes were removed from the Chevrolet vehicle; Similarly, it is not possible to determine the type of vehicle that stopped at that location and what exactly was done there, as the camera does not cover this area. At the same time, we will recall what we said at the beginning, we are dealing with a system of circumstantial evidence, and it is not claimed that there is one clear and unequivocal piece of evidence linking the deceased's killers to the Chevrolet car. However, the deviation of the Chevrolet vehicle to the location where the shoes were found is an important link in the chain of circumstantiality that constitutes the evidentiary combination in this case.