With regard to Natan Harpaz, an accountant by profession, the defense argues that he is a involved witness, who was even questioned under caution as a suspect in some of the affairs. During his interrogation at the police and customs, he understood, like the rest of the interrogees, that if he cooperated to the satisfaction of the interrogators, it would help him get out of the interrogation unscathed, and he did so. In addition, Harpaz acted in order to evade paying his debts to defendant 1, and it was clear to him that the defendant's entanglement in criminal proceedings would make it easier for him to evade payment of the debt.
The reliability of this witness is also questionable and his words were contradicted in the words of the prosecution witness Shlomo Metok.
Shlomo Metuk himself marketed merchandise for various customers of Defendant 1 in other transactions as well, and as someone who referred his clients to Defendant 1 in order to obtain non-bank financing solutions, he was involved in the entire course of the transactions, up to his neck. Matuk was even questioned under caution as a suspect, and had a clear interest in distancing himself from any potential for possible entanglement. In his testimony in court, he clarified that his statements to the police, according to which he sold goods to Uri Resch and to Uri Resh, were inaccurate, and that Matuk preferred to give the matter to the investigators in order to get out of the mess he found himself in. In these circumstances, Metuk's testimony in court should be preferred to his testimony to his testimony to the police, but the versions he gave in court should also be treated with reservations and caution.
A significant part of the introductory chapter was devoted to the evidence submitted by the prosecution to prove a method and similar acts. The prosecution was based, in this context, on the testimony of Elhanan Tenenbaum and Alon Granot.
The acts to which Elhanan Tenenbaum testified, which, according to the prosecution's approach, are sufficient to establish a claim of method and similar acts, are based on three methods of action: fraud against suppliers and theft of goods without paying for it, fraud towards customs by means of reduced supplier invoices, and forging the signature of the carrier on the bill of lading, while stealing the goods.