Thus, for example, the conduct of a certain witness in court may not raise anything in a particular case and cannot serve as an aid to a decision on the matter of credibility, but only other factors, such as the signs of truth that arise from the evidence; in other words, the legislature sought nothing but to draw the attention of the court to issues or factors that it must consider before reaching its decision."
In a Criminal Appeal 803/80 Abutbul v. State of Israel, IsrSC 36(2) 523, 530 was held by the Supreme Court as follows:
"The words 'the circumstances of the case, including the circumstances of the giving of the statement, the evidence presented at trial, the conduct of the witness in the trial, and the signs of truth revealed at trial,' do not indicate that in any case all of the aforementioned elements are required together, as if they were cumulative conditions... The court may base its decision on the data drawn from all or some of the aforementioned data. Each case, of course, is examined in light of its circumstances...".
As part of the exam "The circumstances of the matter"Circumstances that preceded the making of the statement and not circumstances after it shall be taken into account (Criminal Appeal 95/87 Ashur v. State of IsraelIsrSC 41(4) 598). The circumstances of the statement are relevant only to the matter of its weight, and there is no obligation to prove them for the purpose of admissibility. II1000: Another Hearing 23/85 State of Israel v. David Tubul, IsrSC 42(4) 309, 352, President Shamgar emphasized that the answers to all the questions in section 10a(c) The Evidence Ordinance "is a condition without which there is no reliance on a written statement, with preference to the statement of the witness in court." The case law emphasized that the circumstances listed in this section do not constitute a closed list nor do they constitute cumulative requirements. The court may include in its decision additional circumstances for the purpose of examining the question of whether to adopt the witness's version of the foreign statements he made, as well as data derived from all or part of the considerations appearing in the provision of the section. Thus, for example, one of the considerations for answering the question of whether to adopt the version in the statement is the explanation given by the moral of the saying for changing the version and the motive for which he gave his statement - which is false, according to him. Another important consideration is how the version in her statement fits in with the other evidence that was brought in comparison to the integration of the version in the testimony.