A: When I entered.
Q: When we came in this morning, is that what he told you?
A: Yes.
Q: He also told you, you better keep quiet, because they want to drop the whole case on you, because it will be used as evidence against you in court, that's what he told you, yes?
A: Yes."
Discussion – First of all , it should be noted that, as has been noted more than once, Muhammad's version sounded like it could not be believed, and it contradicted the clear evidence that was presented, and it should be emphasized beyond what is necessary that already during the hearing and immediately the accuser's counsel commented that Muhammad's words were relevant to the matter. What was said to him by the prosecution is not true (e.g., p. 277, paras. 4-7), and Adv. Zion, counsel for the accuser, repeated the comment in his written summaries as well. The prosecutor, Adv. Tzori in the transcript of February 14, 2022, paras. 1-8, also noted that "what I told him in the refresher is definitely the line that the defense attorneys will want to say that what happened you did alone and has nothing to do with the defendants, and this is a continuation of his testimony in court in a parallel panel, and they were acquitted."
In addition, it should be said that even if the statements were made by the plaintiffs (and it was not proven that they were made), it does not appear that those statements were actually the ones that influenced Mohammed, who did not remain silent in his testimony at that hearing and gave a detailed version of the defense attorneys' questions.
A review of paragraph 33 of the State Attorney's Directive No. 7.13, which was brought by counsel for defendant 1 in his summaries (p. 39), shows that in that section it is explicitly stated that the prosecutor is "entitled" to invite an accomplice to an offense who is a defendant in another trial...... In order to refresh his memory, and there is no obligation to do so.