It was therefore found that the structured consent form, which the police use for the purpose of signing the object of the search, does not meet the requirements of "informed consent", and the Israel Police should consider this.
In these circumstances, I am unable to determine that the defendant's mother gave informed consent to the penetration of the security camera products she owned, and in fact it is doubtful whether she gave consent at all, in view of the doubts raised by Officer Daniel in his testimony as to the extent to which she understood his words due to the language differences between them, for which they applied retroactively for an order. And after all, as detailed above, it is doubtful at all whether it is possible to obtain "informed consent" on behalf of the subject of the search, which may legitimize a search of a camera that was carried out without a warrant and in the absence of any other source of authority in law. This is when it comes to penetration of the camera's products, as opposed to the physical perception of the camera or the drive.
Therefore, I determine that there were flaws in the police's actions relating to the penetration of the content of the camera installed at the entrance to the defendant's home at 8 Saharon Street, Tel Aviv-Jaffa.
- The video from the camera at 22-24 Nardor Street, Tel Aviv-Yafo (P/5A) was filed by Policeman Michael Gyuri, who is a skilled computer investigator. Officer Giuri made a report of a visit to the scene to the ZIT investigator on July 21, 2022 (P/5), according to which on July 20, 2022, he located an apartment on the first floor belonging to the Kalboni family at 22-24 Nardor Street. Policeman Gyuri gave details about his conversation with Ms. Miriam Kalbuni, as follows:I explained to her that she could refuse, but I grabbed the DVR player at home. I asked her to decide whether she was willing to consent or if I would catch her, explaining her rights to witnesses and her right to refuse, and she agreed to give me the device for examination. I exhausted the necessary evidence from him. I took off all the cameras on the spot, between 12:00 and 14:24. TheUSB I handed it over to my father Daniel for further investigation". In his testimony in court, Policeman Gyuri detailed his actions at the scene, as follows: "I present the owner with what I need to do, ask for her consent, or in this case, can also take it as tangible evidence, and as soon as she agrees, I penetrate the device and take the material on a USB drive." (p. 80 of Prut). Officer Gyuri confirmed that he had infiltrated the DVR and copied its contents to a USB drive, in a manner faithful to the original. According to him, he is authorized to perform this action as a skilled investigator (pp. 90-91 of the protégé). The witness clarified that he had not edited or changed the material he had copied from the security camera at 22 Nardor Street, and that he had no ability or skills to do so (p. 118 of the protégé). According to the witness, he carried out these actions based on the consent he received from the owner of the camera, and therefore the need to obtain a search warrant became superfluous (p. 94 of the protégé). It should be noted that the accuser waived Ms. Kalbuni's summons to testify due to personal circumstances, as brought to the attention of the court (pp. 473-474 of the protégé).
An appendix was submitted to receive digital photographic evidence from a computer conducted by Policeman Gyuri on July 20, 2022 at 14:10, which included Ms. Kalbuni's signature as the digital evidence provider (P/6). In this document, Policeman Gyuri noted that there was a difference between real time and computer time of 2 minutes. Officer Gyuri presented a memorandum he had drawn up on July 31, 2022, regarding "Correction of an Error in the Camera Downloading Report" (P/7; p. 79 of Pruth), in which he noted that on July 20, 2022, at 14:10, he had downloaded cameras at the address of 22-24 Nardor Street with the Kalboni family, and that due to his mistake in recording the time and an error in calculation, it was found that the gap between "real time" and "computer time" was in fact 6 minutes.