In order to substantiate the version, which was first heard during his testimony, the defendant used the place where Rafi Abdeev picked him up (on Sapir Street in Kiryat Yam), as well as media research. The version was joined by Emil Rafalov, who was brought as a defense witness.
Emil Rafalov began to testify on September 15, 2024 (pp. 4396 onwards), but continued to testify on February 6, 2025 (p. 4729 onwards) after about five months, since he allegedly traveled to Neniche and stayed there between the two dates on which he testified.
Emil Rafalov left us with a very negative impression, of a "witness on behalf of us", who was exposed to the defendant's suppressed version and was forced (or forced) to repeat it and echo it. It should also be noted that he was the one through whom the defendant tried to solve the mystery of the personal file, which was no longer in his possession, with the strange claim that the file containing the defendant's personal belongings remained in the home of Emil Rafalov, and after about a year and a half (!) it was taken by one of his children (p. 4732 ff.). In this regard, none of the defendant's children testified, and for good reason. Moreover, Emil Rafalov, according to his version, did not hand over the file himself at all, but left it in his son's restaurant for one of the defendant's children. Strangely, he did not even make sure that the case had indeed been taken. Moreover, he testified that we would talk to the defendant to come to Rashbi's grave in Meron on the eve of Passover (Saturday night, March 27, 2021), but already on Friday, March 26, 2021, the defendant disappeared. According to him, he personally did not try to locate the defendant at all, did not report his absence, and did not take any action to return to the defendant his belongings in the bag, including a breathing apparatus, which, according to him, the defendant could not sleep without. Emil Rafalov was also forced to retract the version of the anonymous phone that was heard from the defendant, claiming that the defendant had told him that his "kosher" phone had been lost. He located another phone for him, but it did not work for some reason, leaving the defendant without a means of communication through which Emil Rafalov could contact him.