The Defendant's Interrogations
In his first interrogation, which was conducted on March 26, 2021 (P/1, P/1B, and also included preliminary questioning - P/1C), the defendant received his full rights, but apart from complaints and responses to the police harassing him, he had nothing to say in his defense. He was offered to consult with an attorney, but he remained silent and did not express interest. Moreover, when he was suspected of committing the crime of murder, he was not at all interested in the identity of the victim who was murdered or in the circumstances of the offense and the case about which he was being investigated. To Yoni Hagag, who rebuked him for his lack of interest, the defendant said, "What difference does it make?" The defendant said that the police were just harassing him, time after time, for a variety of reasons, due to "stigma." The defendant, who maintained his right to remain silent, did not stop talking. But he did not give a version, but continued to complain and complain about the treatment of him. The defendant said that he did not care what he was accused of, and that he could also be accused of "Trumpeldor." The defendant did not even answer the question of whether or not he had murdered anyone at all. He was told that he might have an alibi but he did not respond.
Although no details about the murder were initially provided, at some point the identity of the victim was disclosed. According to Investigator Erman (February 9, 2023, p. 1889), if the defendant had asked to resume the consultation after he had been given the details of the murder, his request would have been given to him, as testified by the head of the team, Shai Peleg (March 1, 2023, p. 2268). The defendant did not ask for this at all, sat in front of the interrogator and completely ignored what he was told, including the questions of where he lived and with whom, if he worked and where. The same applies to the questions we will be asked explicitly about the Chevrolet car.