The defense also came out against the words of the aforementioned witness, which allegedly served the narrative that the prosecution sought to create, without evidentiary basis and while contradicting his own words. The witness's claims of harassment by the defendant were not proven, and were based on speculation and conjecture. Ultimately, it was claimed, there was a proper business neighborly relationship and the witness even used the defendant for his various needs.
In his testimony (April 10, 2024, p. 3816, s. 1 ff.), the defendant said that in 1990 he began to work in the aluminum field and employed many workers. After his business was in various places, on April 4, 1995, he made a deal with Shlomo Einhorn (z"l) for the purchase of 1 dunam for $110,000. Three days later, on April 7, 1995, an agreement was drawn up by an intermediary (P/26), and two bank checks were given at the same time "on the account", each for the sum of ILS 100,000 and for a total of ILS 200,000, on account of the consideration. Later, Shlomo Einhorn fell into debt and in addition to the completion of the payment (in the amount of ₪100,000), the defendant lent him the sum of ILS 250,000. The business was located in the industrial zone in Nesher, in the Einhorn complex is the "dispute area". The plot purchased by the defendant was Plot 93, the number of which was later changed to Plot 49 on which his business is built, while there are also Plots 48 and 50 in the complex. Subsequently, the defendant was involved in an accident, suffered severe head and facial injuries, was hospitalized, and has not been working since 2006. He said that in 2005 he began working for one of his clients in the rehabilitation of fire damage. He was responsible for teams executing projects throughout the country. Prior to that, he provided aluminum services to various entities, later he was an employee, then he was involved in another accident, fell off a ladder, underwent surgery, stopped working and received a pension from the National Security Council.