Defendant 2 describes that he had a fight with Muhammad on the road because he saw that something had been set on fire, and according to him, he understood that something was wrong since a person would not burn a car for no reason (ibid., p. 360). Defendant 2 said that Muhammad did not tell him about the murder, and that he found out about it himself only two days after the incident from the news. According to him, he still does not know who really committed the murder and that he is fed by rumors (ibid., p. 361). Two weeks later, he said, Muhammad was arrested and he became scared because he knew something was wrong. The defendant said that when he was arrested, he lied to his interrogators and shouted and cried, explaining that "I can't talk, just incriminate a human being. My brother was murdered, if I speak up and accuse him and he did not do it, they will murder another brother of mine" (ibid., pp. 363, paras. 1, 2). The defendant went on to say that he did not know the deceased, he confirmed that he knew that Muhammad had been stabbed in the face but did not know of Muhammad's intention to murder the deceased. The defendant repeatedly explained to the police that it was illogical for him to go and commit murder in flip-flops (as seen in his interrogation in the video at the gas station) with his phone and his car equipped with Ituran. (ibid., p. 364).
First of all, it should be said that during his testimony in court, the defendant gave his testimony in a convincing manner, and as a rule, no significant internal contradictions were found in his version in court that could have damaged the testimony. As stated, in the first interrogations of defendant 2 to the police, the defendant did not tell the version he gave in court that all of his actions in the incident in question were intended for the purpose of bringing drugs from the south to the center – the "drug deal" – and not for the purpose of murder. In his fourth interrogation with the police, the defendant gave details that could imply that he had been deceived by another and that hints of the drug deal could be found in them, but the fact that the defendant did not disclose this in his first interrogations with the police will leave the title "the suppressed version" above the version he gave in court, a headline that indicates that the version he gave was flawed.