Watching the video shows that it was filmed from inside a car and not while riding a motorcycle, when the ride was very slow and at the beginning of a slight and moderate ascent. The defendant is heard saying in his voice: "A speed of 10 kilometers per hour and the whole vehicle is shaking. The vibration scooter may be a little stronger."
- During his cross-examination, the defendant confirmed that as a result of the ride on the cattle crossing, the telephone fell out of his pocket [Prov. lines 19-22 at p. 102]:
"The court: So the phone flew out of his pocket?
Witness Mr. Liran: I fell to the bottom of the scooter.
The Court: At the time of the incident with the plaintiff?
Witness Mr. Liran: Yes, yes."
The defendant reiterated that if the jump had occurred as described by the plaintiff, the phone that protruded from his shirt pocket would have flown out of the motorcycle, and the fact that it had only fallen to the bottom of the motorcycle indicates that it was only a slight vibration.
As to the speed of travel, the defendant replied that he drove at a "reasonable" speed, "in accordance with the road conditions", and that he did not look at the speedometer, but he estimates that he drove on the cattle barrier at a speed of 30 km/h or less [Prov. pp. 106-107].
The defendant was referred to a WhatsApp correspondence between the parties, which took place on October 21, 2018, following the plaintiff's request to him, and a copy was attached to the parties' exhibits. From this correspondence, which constitutes an initial version of the defendant, it appears that the defendant also admitted that there was a jump while driving on the cattle crossing:
"Hey,
- I'm sorry that we're talking in such circumstances.
- I don't know if you consulted with someone qualified on the matter, but such lawsuits, against insurance companies, cost a fortune and I find it hard to believe that you have a case here, unfortunately. And I will elaborate:
- You will have to prove a direct circumstantial connection between the "damage" and this specific "event", in my opinion, it will be difficult for you if at all. Lawyers from insurance companies will ask questions underground and doubt whether there is a direct connection.
- At that time, no "insurance event" was opened, and six months later, the insurance companies' lawyers will claim that with the passage of time there is no way to prove a direct connection, especially since there was no incident of a P.D. That was reported, but only a jump at a cattle checkpoint on the road.
With all the sorrow, and believe me, I am hurt by the whole story, since you are still important to me, but such a lawsuit will not get you anywhere in my opinion..... Sorry. In my opinion, it is a shame that money will be wasted here... I'm really sorry. L"