Policemen: Sgt. Almog Yehuda Ratsabi (A.T.4), Sgt. Nuriel Aharon (A.T.5), Sgt. Uri Yitzhaki (A.T.6), Sgt. Sgt. Yossi Assaf Salah (A.T.7), Sgt. Nathaniel Weizmann (A.T.8), Sgt. Sgt. Niv Kuperly (A.T.16), Sgt. Meni Ohayon (A.T.17), Sgt. Elad Karadi (A.T.18), Sgt. Ofir Ben Simon (A.T.19), Sgt. Sgt. Elitzur Dinar (A.T.21), Sgt. Sgt. Yigal Singer (A.T.22), Sgt. Sgt. Yoav Barkan (A.T.22); Sgt. Yoav Barkan (A.T.21); Sgt. Sgt. Yigal Singer (A.T.22); Sgt. Yoav Barkan (A.T.22); Sgt. Yoav Barkan (A.T.21); Sgt. Sgt. Yigal Singer (A.T.22); Sgt. Yoav Barkan (A.T.22) T.28; Sgt. Eshet Aisa (A.T.29); Commander Orit Daniel (A.T.30); Sgt. Nicholas Daniel Magid (A.T.31); Sgt. Jan Levitt (A.T.32); Sgt. Sgt. Lawrence Basel (A.T.33); Sgt. Ziv Greenberg (A.T.34); Sgt. Meir Hadida (A.T.35); Sgt. Eyal Zeitoun (hereinafter: "Investigator Eyal Zeitoun", A.T.38); Sgt. Yochai Triki (A.T.39), Sgt. Elad Avraham (hereinafter: "Investigator Elad Avraham", A.T.41); Superintendent Tamir Avtvi (A.T.42); Sgt. Sgt. Danny Bokobza (A.T.43); and Sgt. Sgt. Zephania Karbi (A.T.44).
Medical professionals, including medical experts: Netanel Attias (A.T.2); Ofir Peretz (A.T.25); Moshe Cohen (A.T.26); Yosef Zagori (A.T.27); Dr. Nurit Bublil (A.T.23); Dr. Alon Krispin (A.T.24); Dr. Roman Streltsov (A.T.36); Dr. Ilya Rafliansky (A.T.37); Ari Friedman (A.T.40).
- On behalf of the defense , the defendant (A.H.1) - Maor Dadon testified.
In addition to the statements to the police and the testimonies heard in court, the parties submitted additional evidence, documents and medical documentation. These will be reviewed, according to their degree of necessity, and taking into account their relevance in the decision. It is clarified and clarified, in order to understand the structure and sequence of the judgment, that testimonies that were heard in court, and evidence submitted by the parties, to the extent that they were found, at the end of the day, and after focusing and clarifying the precise definitions of the dispute, as not contributing to an informed decision in its enactment, will not be reviewed at all, and will not be detailed. However, the whole is flat and before us.
- It should be noted that several attempts were made to conduct a visit by the panel to the scene, with counsel for the parties, but this was not helped (other than for reasons controlled by the parties). Therefore, our impression of the scene is based on videos produced from the body cameras of the police officers who were called to the scene, photographic reenactments submitted to the court file, still images, and security camera footage that operated in close proximity to the relevant scenes.
As stated, these will also be discussed below - whether extensively or briefly - in accordance with their importance and possible implications for the decision.