Conclusion and Decision on the Minor Claim in All Its Parts, and in the Preliminary Arguments
- From all of the above, The claim of the minor in all its parts must be rejected.
Both from the testimonies of the intelligence investigators and from the testimony of the defendant himself, it appears that there were no negotiations for a state-witness agreement.
172 and all the evidence related to the process of taking testimony in the framework of it indicates that this was not a continuation of the dialogue with the intelligence personnel, and it was not a negotiation for a state-witness agreement.
The allegations of flaws in the interrogation in relation to P/172 should be rejected, since the interrogation is a continuation (after a break of a few minutes) of an interrogation with a warning, and with all the rights granted, to the same interrogator, and then to another interrogator.
In any event, there is no doubt that the defendant gave the statements of his own free will, and of his own initiative, and that he is the one who leads and leads the investigation to the areas he desires.
The petty claim also embodied a preliminary argument regarding protection from justice, and for all the aforementioned reasons, this argument should also be rejected. I do not see any violation of the principles of justice or legal fairness, in the investigative conduct that took place with the defendant, nor in the acceptance of the interrogation P/172 with all its contents as admissible.
There is no basis for any such claim. This is a defendant who is well aware of all his rights, and he is the one who wishes to negotiate, on his own initiative, in an interrogation room, with a police investigator, for the return of weapons in exchange for a reduction in his sentence.
The defendant's confessions
- In accordance with the above, stated in the second part of the investigation on the day 2.8.16 Acceptable, and related exhibits, A/172 (The Disc) and the transcript Kabilim and can also be used as evidence of the defendant's duty.
It is necessary to examine whether his statements in this interrogation amount to a confession as claimed by the accuser or only a confession as claimed by the defendant's counsel, and whether they lead to conclusions regarding his part in the affair.