Defendant 2's relatively "slow" drive from the murder scene to Lod – moreover, during the hearing of the evidence, the court was presented with additional evidence, which appears to be significant, which supports Defendant 2's version. I am referring to Muhammad's words to the informant during their conversation in the detention cell, as quoted above:
"Detainee No. 2, Muhammad Assiwi: ... I am what he gave me... 6x 6 x 5,000 gasoline, five minutes ten minutes we will be in Lod. ...
Stop No. 1, known as "Bilal Rayyan": 6x 200 passengers.
Stop No. 2, Muhammad Assiwi: Without being pressured, 5,000 turbocharged gasoline. .....
Stop No. 1, known as "Bilal Rayan": How long did it take you to reach Lod?
Detainee No. 2, Muhammad Assiwi: Maybe 40 minutes." (P/20A, p. 12).
As noted, in these words of Muhammad to the informant, Muhammad expresses resentment that on the return drive from the meeting point in the Hura area to the city of Lod, defendant 2 drove slowly, and according to him, the X6 vehicle driven by defendant 2 could cover the distance to the city of Lod in 15 minutes, but in practice the trip took 40 minutes (in fact, it took about an hour from 20:32 to 21:33, as detailed above). This fact will strengthen the argument of defendant 2 that according to his understanding, when fleeing from the area of the murder to the city of Lod, he was driving at a speed that is 1/3 of the speed at which he could and should have driven had he known about the murder, because he was not at all aware that they were actually fleeing from the area where the murder was committed.
It should be emphasized that in the case at hand the fast travel was critical for Mohammed, who had to reach Lod in order to prove the claim of the "alibi" that he had made as stated above, and this fact would give extra weight to the fact that defendant 2 drove relatively slowly along the same section of road.
Distant family connection and no motive was proven – Moreover, as noted above, during the hearings, it was proven that the relationship between defendants 2 and 3 and Muhammad was "loose", there was no real friendship between the defendants and Muhammad, who was a friend of defendant 2's brother, and from Muhammad's words to the informant, it even appears that defendant 2 was a friend of his haters. No motive was proven before defendant 2, who had no criminal record, and before defendant 3, to cooperate with Muhammad and defendant 1, in the commission of the murder, with all the implications of this as detailed above.