Caselaw

Criminal Case (Be’er Sheva) 20958-08-24 State of Israel – F.M. v. Muhammad Azzam - part 39

April 30, 2026
Print

The scope and content of the aforementioned findings well anchor the defendant's confessions regarding the obsessive and unusual consumption of ISIS content; the use of an encrypted application and locking access to libraries and folders containing operative ways of killing and dying by various means; Browsing in a dedicated browser to watch videos of different types of Dar'ar and a variety of content, including meticulous monitoring of a variety of content that includes brutal violence, including beheadings.

The relationship and discourse between the defendant and his fellow supporters of the appeal is different about ISIS

  1. 31. The report of the unloading of the defendant's mobile phone revealed many conversations between the defendant and his friends: Bilal that my friend(P/21, p. 22); Ahmad al-Faluji and Tamer Ismail (P/20).

The findings indicate that the defendant spoke frequently with his friend Tamer Ismail about ISIS, the organization's posts, and the Caliph.  From the WhatsApp correspondence between the two, content was found (P/21, pp. 17-20), which clearly testifies to his proficiency in the intricacies of the organization and its ongoing use and in the terms of Madras, as he would later tell about them in his interrogations with the ISA (P/12, P/15).

In a correspondence on January 7, 2024, the two discussed a different appeal and what the defendant called a "frightening archive", which he refused to pass on and even to talk via WhatsApp: "Only when I meet you, is it better not here" (P/21, p. 19, para. 16).  In this context, and after the correspondence regarding the archive above, additional voice calls were found that were transferred between the defendant and Tamer via WhatsApp, conversations dated January 11, 2024, one of which lasted about 48 minutes (P/21, p. 23, para. 5.1.1.2).

Comrade Bilal Shahbari was interrogated by the ISA and his interrogations were submitted with consent (P/19 and P/20).  During his interrogation, Bilal stated that he used to talk to the defendant about a different appeal once or twice a month, although their conversations in this context were "joking" (S. 142, P/19).

Previous part1...3839
40...85Next part