In summary, it was argued that defendant 1 was not involved in any fraudulent and fraudulent activities in order to enable the theft of the goods free of charge.
As to the allegations regarding the taking of the goods without paying for them, it was argued by defendant 1 that they have no basis in reality or logic. After Defendant 4 informed Defendant 1 that he had reached an agreement with the supplier outside of the credit facility, Defendant 1 handled an alternative financing solution and financing the costs of release. In this framework, defendant 1 mediated between the client and shipping companies, customs brokers and release companies that had employment relations with him, and there is nothing wrong with this. At the beginning of the transaction, defendant 1 was given security checks, as part of the financing proceedings, and these were cancelled and in any case were not redeemed, except for an amount that was used to pay costs and commissions to various entities that provided services to Avi Kalamaro. Due to Kalmaro's financial difficulties and the fear that a foreclosure would be imposed on the goods before they were released, defendant 1 offered to mediate between him and a company that would provide clearance services and be presented as an importer, instead of OPCI, which belongs to Avi Kalmaro. The company chosen was Schloss, Kalmaro expressed his consent to this, and therefore Schloss was registered as informed in the transport document, so that it could carry out the release of the goods. This was done with the approval and consent of Elhanan Tenenbaum, who was the owner of Schloss, as he was supposed to receive a financial commission. Kalmaro's testimony in this context, according to which he never met Elhanan Tenenbaum, is a suppressed and weightless version whose sole purpose is to place responsibility on Defendant 1.
Defendant 1 categorically rejects the claim that Schloss was the one who physically released the goods, and claims that the evidence unequivocally shows that the person who carried out the physical release of the goods was none other than Avi Kalamaro. Immediately after receiving the physical possession of the goods, Avi Kalmaro realized the purpose of importing and sold it to Bezeq, through OPCI. Defendant 1 claims that defendant 4 received from Bezeq the full consideration for the sale of the goods.