The witness was asked many questions about the legal dispute that is the subject of the plots, the lion's share of which he answered that he did not remember, since he did not come prepared for a legal hearing that deals with the plots and the evolution of legal matters related to them for many years. He was presented with numerous documents that allegedly bear his signature, and he said he did not know them. According to him, negotiations were conducted with the defendant for the purchase of plot 48, while in plot 50 the defendant was sold an "usufruct interest". He further claimed that the registration of the defendant's (or his wife's) ownership of Plot 49 at the Land Registry Office was done illegally, incidental to corrupt actions (November 26, 2023, p. 3161, paras. 29 ff.).
Moshe Einhorn added that the defendant retracted a lawsuit he had filed against the witness and others (to the Haifa District Court), and the lawsuit was dismissed. The defendant asked to bring them to a Torah trial in a court of justice, the witness refused, and the defendant arrived with his wife, in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, in order to convince him. The defendant appealed to the Court of Justice and the witness was surprised when he received a summons. In any event, he could not accede to the defendant's request to litigate according to Torah law, in view of the strong opposition of the deceased and his nephew, Yosef Mandel (the additional heir). He did not refute the argument that he said in a court of justice that as far as he was concerned, a condition for the continuation of the litigation was that the defendant withdraw his claim that was filed with the District Court. Contrary to what was alleged against him, the witness said that he was present at several court hearings.
Regarding the defendant's arrival at his office, the witness said (26 November 2023, p. 3194): "I am beginning to recall, Ephraim Arnon sued him for an invasion even without connection to Einhorn, Ephraim Arnon represented Nissim Abu Hatzira yes he invaded his building line without connection and Mr. Avioz wanted me to confirm that I sold him as he said in 2011 it was my father who sold it to him. I don't know why he said I sold it, it was in 2011, I wasn't involved in this matter at all, I sold him the building line that is adjacent to Nissim Abu Hatsira that I would do this thing, I told him I am not ready under any circumstances, my father sold Nissim Abu Hatsira a plot plus a building line and I went and sold you the same building line, A bit of integrity." As for the defendant's response, the witness confirmed that after the shelves and books fell, the defendant tried to pick them up and arrange them.