Caselaw

Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 40013/05 State of Israel v. Uri Resch - part 54

September 13, 2011
Print

In its summary, the prosecution argues that there is no real dispute that defendants 1 and 4 released the goods through the Manfield company, and that the attempt to place the matter on Elhanan Tenenbaum's shoulders is false.  In addition, there is no dispute that this is a false import license, since it is based on a false and forged supplier.  Defendant 4 admitted that he had received the goods and sold the computers to Bezeq, when the supplier's testimony revealed that this defendant had denied to him that the goods had reached him.  The prosecution further claimed that the defendants continued to deceive the supplier and promise him various promises that the debt would be repaid, knowing that there was no intention to do so.  For this purpose, fax dispatches from a company called Nova Holdings Ltd., which asks the supplier to be patient and that it take upon itself the debt, in a manner that will exempt defendant 4 from any obligation to the transaction.  In the accuser's summaries it was stated that there was no indication of the existence of a company with this name and that none of the defendants gave an explanation for the appearance of this company: "As another player in the deal."  The prosecution argues that since defendants 1 and 4 are responsible for the act of forgery and fraud in the first stage, the burden is on them to show that they are not connected to the fraud relating to the company Nova Holdings Ltd..

As stated, there is a substantial contradiction between the versions of defendants 1 and 4, and the prosecution is of the opinion that none of them should be trusted.  Defendant 1's version in court does not match what he gave during his interrogation with the police and is a "suppressed version", and Defendant 4's version is also unreliable and has been refuted in objective documents.  The two defendants tried to attribute the fraud to Elhanan Tenenbaum, who was kidnapped to Lebanon, and after his return, defendant 1 asked defendant 4 to present the transaction as a transaction executed by Elhanan Tenenbaum.

Previous part1...5354
55...320Next part