Caselaw

Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 40013/05 State of Israel v. Uri Resch - part 130

September 13, 2011
Print

As to the claim that a false bill of lading was attached to the bill of lading, defendant 1 claims that he has no connection to this matter as well.  According to Defendant 1, Defendants 3 and 4 worked together to order the goods, to receive the bill of lading and to convert it, in order to release the goods and take them into the hands of Defendant 4, and now they are trying to place the responsibility for their actions on his shoulders.

The connection with the shipping company RGS was made exclusively by Yehoshua Shlosh, and defendant 1 had no connection with it.  Even with the manager of the bail warehouse, David Cohen, Defendant 1 had no contact, and all the contacts were made with Yehoshua Shlosh.

Another argument made by defendant 1 is that the prosecution did not present any evidence that the supplier did not receive the consideration to which it was entitled, and the defense never agreed that the consideration was not paid in full to the supplier.

With regard to the marketing and sale of the goods toOPCI, Defendant 1 claims that this was done after the customers withdrew from selling the goods to the Palestinian Authority.  When it was decided to sell the goods toOPCI,  Defendant 1 agreed to serve as guarantor, in case Defendant 4 did not meet his financial obligations.  Apart from this guarantee, defendant 1 had no part in taking the goods and selling them toOPCI.  In retrospect, he learned that there was an early relationship between defendants 3 and 4 and that they were both involved in the transaction from the beginning.  Defendant 1 wishes not to give credence to the testimony of defendant 4 in court, which is a suppressed and unreliable testimony.  Defendant 1 vehemently denies that he received any consideration for the transaction, and claims that the only sums he received were payment for the release taxes, which he financed for Yehoshua Shlosh, for his clients.  The sum of NIS 429,000 that was transferred to Nofar Dynamic is not the profits of the "sting", but rather the reimbursement of the financing of the release taxes that were injected "without any profit accruing here".

Previous part1...129130
131...320Next part