The primary requirement, which is also identical in the basic offense of murder, which was not accompanied by an aggravating circumstance, is, as also stated in section 300(a) of the law, that the defendant is a person who "intentionally or indifferently causes the death of a person."
A criminal thought exists in a defendant (section 20(a) of the law), when he had "awareness of the nature of the act, of the existence of the circumstances, and of the possibility of causing the results of the act..." Intentional causation means that the defendant committed the act "with the aim of causing the same results" ( section 20(a)(1)). And section 20(a)(b) states that "foreseeing the occurrence of the consequences, as a near certainty possibility, is tantamount to a goal to cause them."
The application of the jurisprudential and statutory "presumption of awareness" will require a determination, in our case, as well, that the defendant was aware that such many stabbings, and in the areas in which they were carried out (in the upper part of the deceased's body) - are liable to cause a severe result of death. This is between, as a direct result of a stabbing, inter alia, in a sensitive and even critical organ - the lung, or due to massive blood loss, due to the large number of stabbings. Any reasonable person sees in advance, as a near certainty, that the fatal result will occur - given the tool used (a cold weapon - a knife or a knife, according to the experts), the number of stabbings, their depth, and the body parts to which the stabbings were directed.
If so, the law dictates that in these circumstances, the defendant is considered to have intentionally caused the death of the deceased, even if there is no direct external evidence of his state of mind at the time, and of his clear desire that his victim deprive him of his life.
The existence of the aggravating circumstance attributed to the defendant, if it is substantiated, will lead to the classification of the offense of murder he committed as "murder under aggravated circumstances", for which the penalty is mandatory life imprisonment. This provision was added to the statute book in the framework of the 2019 reform of homicide offenses, and the ruling, which is not very numerous, deals with its proper implementation, and according to the legislature's intention to approve it (see a comprehensive review in Criminal Appeal 8363/19, Granot v. MI, dated June 8, 2021).