- A.A. 35, the Negev Division, who served at the relevant times as the head of the Intelligence Division in the Negev Division, the officer in charge when A.A. 34 and a.A33 Under his command. He joined the third meeting in order to advance the investigation that began on behalf of A.A. 33-34. The witness emphasized that the main goal was the return of the weapons, and that he was the one who had completed the intelligence investigation, and that in the last meeting with the defendant, which took place on 24 July 2016, he conveyed the message that the matter was over - that "there is no deal and there is nothing" (p. 19 March 2017, p. 152, para. 16). The witness was asked and replied that here we were not talking about incriminating others, or even about incriminating him himself, but rather that it was an "intelligence deal" (Prov. 19 March 2017, p. 169, paras. 9-11).
Witnesses from the police investigation :
- A.A. 13, Sgt. Eyal Zeitoun, the chief police investigator who conducted most of the investigation in the police file. He interrogated the defendant, his son (Adi), the officer Shadi, took testimonies and collected evidence, and he was also the one who was in the controversial interrogation on 2 August 2017. (P/172) and the one that preceded it (P/163). According to him, a regular investigation into the weapons file, which was documented in the framework of P/163, began, and then he was asked to move on to the interrogation of the defendant in another matter, in the Al-Mab file, and changed the recording disc, and at this point the defendant began to talk again about the weapons file, and his statements in the framework of this recording (P/172B) amounted to confessions and his integration into the affair.
- A.A. 24. Superintendent Mazal Astrakhan, who served as the head of the interrogation department of the Central Police Department, was in charge of the investigation, and interrogated the defendant in the controversial testimony of August 2, 2016 (P/172). According to her, the investigation began as a regular investigation into the case (P/163), and at a certain point it was requested (by A.A. 24) to interrogate in a different proceeding, but as part of the other interrogation, the defendant began to confess to his part in the case of the burglary and theft of the weapons.