Caselaw

Serious Crimes Case (Beersheba) 20142-08-19 State of Israel v. Ibrahim Shehain - part 14

October 23, 2025
Print

According to the defense attorneys, no weight should be given to the foreign statements of the witness Muhammad, and his testimony in court should be preferred, even if it is accompanied by certain flaws, as they claim that it is a version given by him when the fear he faced was removed – his conviction in his own trial, and it is his true version of events.

The defense argued that the accuser's conduct in her attempt to dissuade Muhammad from testifying, and her confirmation that Muhammad was informed that the defense in this case would try to "drop" the murder on him, there was a reason for the flaw and that this fact should be given weight in the verdict, since it is clear that following this statement, Muhammad did not want to cooperate in his testimony.

The defense argued that there was no dispute that there was a conspiracy, but they claimed that the conspiracy was for the purpose of stealing the drugs and that there was no evidence that the defendants had a connection to the murder.  Counsel for defendants 2-3 argued that defendants 2-3 had no interest in assisting Muhammad in the murder of the deceased, especially after a similar and even serious incident was presented to the court, which was closely related to the brother of defendant 2 – Marwan, who was murdered, in which the family members of defendant 2 chose not to go out and harm Marwan's murderers.  According to counsel for defendants 2 and 3, defendant 2 feared for his safety and the well-being of his family, due to "notorious criminals" from Muhammad's family, therefore, he had no choice but to remain silent or lie in the interrogation room.

It was further claimed that from the interrogation of Defendant 2, it emerged that Defendant 2 tried to direct the interrogator Zeitun and to share with him, within the limits to which he was subjected, that another person was present with him who allegedly did something without his knowledge and "sniffed him" as he put it.

The defense argued that according to defendant 2 in his testimony in court, he would not have come to the murder with his wallet and mobile phone and slippers.

Previous part1...1314
15...142Next part