It was further argued that the points on which the parties disagreed related to the family connection between Muhammad and the defendants, which did exist, but was a distant family connection. ; It was noted that the defendants denied that they had conspired to commit the murder with Muhammad, and claimed that Muhammad had approached Defendant 2 a few days before the events that are the subject of the indictment, with a "business offer" to steal drugs from a young woman's family. ; Defendant 2 confirmed that he drove with Muhammad to the Occupied Territories in order for Muhammad to acquire a car for the purpose of carrying out the plan, but denied that he knew that the vehicle would be used to commit murder. In addition, Defendant 2 denied that he had returned to the State of Israel from a different checkpoint in order to obscure evidence and prevent its future discovery. ; The defendants confirmed that they had spoken to each other at the Lakiya gas station, but according to their version, the conversation related to the drug theft plan and not to the crime of murder. ; The defendants stated that they arrived at the meeting point under Muhammad's direction and waited there, and denied that before leaving the scene, they had set fire to any vehicle, and that the main dispute between the parties lies in the awareness of defendants 2-3 of the alleged murder.
It was argued that both from the testimony of defendants 2-3 and from the testimony of Mohammed, it emerged that the relationship between the parties was a distant family relationship, and that a business relationship was created between them, since Muhammad and Marwan, the older brother of defendant 2, were engaged together in drug trafficking and after the latter was stabbed to death, a business relationship was born between Muhammad and defendant 2, and nothing more.
Counsel for the defendants argued that in Muhammad's first testimony in court on 22 October 2020, Muhammad refused to answer the accuser's questions, which sought to declare him a hostile witness, and to submit all of his statements by virtue of section 10A of the Evidence Ordinance. The court accepted the request and declared Muhammad a hostile witness. According to the defendants' counsel, in his cross-examination, Muhammad confirmed the "drug version," and said that he was the main factor in the drug program and that the rest of those involved were not "informed" about the program in private detail.