Interrogation dated 17 July 2024 by the so-called Regev (P/11); Interrogation dated 17 July 2024 by the person known as Marco (P/12); Interrogation dated 18 July 2024 by the person known as Shaul (P/15); interrogation dated 18 July 2024 by the so-called Ehud (P/16); Interrogation dated 19 July 2024 by Yoav (P/17);
Two ISA interrogations conducted by the so-called "Aya" on 17 July 2024 (Exhibit 13) and on 18 July 2024 (Exhibit 14) were submitted during her testimony in court.
The defendant's interrogations at the police were marked P/3, P/5-P/8. Of these, an interrogation was submitted with consent and without cross-examination, dated 22 July 2024, by Officer Abud (P/3).
In the course of the prosecution's case, the following testified in court: the interrogator in charge of the ISA, known as "Aya"; an expert on behalf of the ISA known as "Yishai" (hereinafter quoted according to their names), through whom an expert opinion of the ISA was submitted (P/28);
the head of the police investigative team, Sgt. Haim al-Shami, through whom investigations were submitted (P/20); and the police sergeant, Sgt. Wupika Amon, through (P/19).
Summary of the prosecution's arguments
The parties agreed orally on September 27, 2025, and at their request they submitted further written summaries.
- In its written and oral summaries, the prosecution claimed that it had proven beyond a reasonable doubt the facts of the indictment and petitioned to convict the defendant of the offense of membership in a terrorist organization according to Section 22(a) to the Counter-Terrorism Law.
At the beginning of its summaries, the prosecution argued that in light of the changes that had occurred in the versions of the defendant and the defense throughout the course of the trial, the scope of the dispute between the parties was inconsistent and irregular even up to the stage at which it submitted its summaries. The prosecution pointed out that after the defendant's response to the indictment, the dispute revolved around a number of questions: