Caselaw

Criminal Case (Be’er Sheva) 29984-08-16 State of Israel v. Muhammad Zoabi - part 17

August 17, 2017
Print

The Minor Claim

  1. The claim of the minor who raises in"The defendant is in relation to the defendant's interrogation on the day 2.8.16, The same interrogation that took place minutes after the interrogation/163, And this is the investigation whose filming was submitted as part of the/172.

It was argued that this investigation was inadmissible (P/172) for several reasons that can be divided into two issues :

The first is with regard to the substance of this investigation, which was claimed to have taken place in the framework of negotiations to bring the defendant to be a state witness, and it was claimed that in light of this, the defendant's words were said in this framework, and therefore are inadmissible.

The second is a series of claims about flaws in this interrogation, including: lack of warning, violation of the defendant's right as a suspect to remain silent during his interrogation, violation of the right to counsel and the right to representation, and in addition the use of improper interrogation methods that include misleading the defendant and enticing him to say things.

It should be noted that in the framework of these arguments, defense from justice arguments were also raised, and were combined together with the minor arguments, and therefore all of them will be discussed in a single framework, especially since the claims are interrelated.

I will refer below to the two parts of the argument separately.

Claim of inadmissibility - on the pretext of making statements in the framework of negotiations to bring the defendant to be a state witness

  1. As mentioned above, II"The defendant claims that the defendant's statements during the interrogation date 2.8.16 In the second part (A/172), They were in the framework of"From Towards a State Witness Agreement, Therefore, they are not admissible.

This claim has several layers - first, with regard to the fact that there were meetings between intelligence personnel and the defendant, it was claimed that there were negotiations to make the defendant a state witness.

Previous part1...1617
18...77Next part