Observing the question and the answer, and the defendant's conduct, leads to a clear conclusion that the defendant confirms the positive answer to the investigator's question by his statement and his clear body movements.
The defendant is involved in dialogue, questions and answers, and immediately afterwards, when he wants to say something different from other things that are said, he gets up, bursts out and says it, and the clear conclusion is that he is very attentive to the God of the word being said, and that his confirmation of the interrogator's words in her question is not mere confirmation, and is not casual and general.
The defendant explicitly confirms, by statement and with a nod of his head twice, that the weapons were loaded onto his vehicle.
I will now turn to additional statements by the accused, some of them an explicit confession, and part of which is the provision of data from which there can be only one conclusion - that he himself saw the weapon and received it in his possession.
The defendant is asked and answers explicitly about his part in the affair in the "percentages" and answers that his share in the affair is 20%, Shadi's share is 50% and his son Adi's share is 30%, and when asked why Shadi is more than Adi, he replies that . "Listen, without him, nothing moves, you will agree." (P/172B, p. 46, S. 19 - P. 47, S. 30)
Later on, we will be asked :
"Researcher No ., 1 Eyal Zeitoun: Earlier it is a part 100% is a part and believe me if it comes out the part [02:25:12.195] of mine is twenty percent Shadi fifty and his son is thirty is the division they tell him no matter what comes out here if your part is really twenty percent you have to tell.
Interrogated, Muhammad Zoabi: [02:25:25.570] (An unclear sentence( That's my definition, that's my estimate."
(P/172B, p. 81, paras. 28-32).
At a certain point, in his statements, the defendant ties himself directly to Shadi, despite previous claims regarding his lack of acquaintance. The defendant was asked whether Shadi knew him, and he answered "clearly" (P/172B, p. 44, questions 14-15). At an earlier stage in his interrogation, he even notes that Shadi received money on three occasions, and of course this is in relation to this affair: