Here, too, the impression that arose from the testimony supports the position that high weight should be given to those statements that were made against the interest.
The Liability of the Accused Companies Due to the Actions of Individuals in Them
- Above we discussed the criteria and tests that have been established with regard to attributing criminal liability to corporations - in our case, the defendant companies. The application of the aforesaid in the circumstances of the case before us and on the basis of all the evidence that has been brought leads to the conclusion that Oshri and Shachar should be regarded as organs of Wee, Zeiger and Gilad as organs of Harel and Neve and Nahum as organs of Triple C, so that the acts and criminal thoughts of these will be attributed to the defendant companies respectively. Let us now elaborate on these. Shohat's case and his status as an organist of Matrix will be discussed separately in the framework of the hearing of the eleventh charge (see paragraph 739 below).
Wei - Oshri and Shachar are organs of Wei
- Oshri - Oshri Bowie, which he joined in 2006, held a number of positions on the dates relevant to the indictment. In the early stages, from the beginning of 2007 or thereabouts, he served as the company's infrastructure manager, with a number of salespeople working under him, and he was responsible for the business activity in the infrastructure field (p. 4694, paras. 2-19; p. 4695, paras. 2-23; p. 4697, paras. 15-21). At the end of 2007, Wii was acquired by another company. At the same time, the field of infrastructure under Oshri's responsibility became more and more dominant (p. 4695, paras. 15-23). During this period, Oshri served as the company's acting vice president, even though he did not have such an official "title", and he was directly subordinate to the founders of Wee who served as CEOs (p. 4694, s. 21 - p. 4698, s. 4). In 2010, after the departure of the founders of Wei, Oshri formally became VP of the company as well, while at that time he was acting without a CEO above him and under direct subordination to the chairman of the board of directors (p. 4695, paras. 21-23, p. 4275, paras. 8-9; p. 4276, s. 1-5). In February 2011, Oshri was appointed co-CEO of the company together with another, with Oshri responsible for the entire business part (P/327, p. 4274, s. 11-17; p. 4275, s. 20-25; p. 4700, s. 15-22, where he explained that he had the same powers even before his appointment). According to the above tests, taking into account the roles he held, his powers and his responsibilities, Oshri was an organist of Wei on all the relevant dates (Wei and Oshri did not dispute this, p. 6988, paras. 19-20).
- Shahar - On the relevant dates of the indictment, Shahar was a salesman and customer manager at Wei who was in charge of executing procurement transactions in the field of computing solutions with a number of customers, including a civil appeal (p. 2612, paras. 22-24).
It appears that Shachar began working at Wii in February 2009 (P/328, p. 3590, paras. 1-2; p. 3332, paras. 23-29; p. 3333, paras. 7-12, even though Shachar testified that he had started much earlier, for example, p. 3310, paras. 1-2). Oshri was the one who recruited Shachar to work at Wee. This is based on a past professional acquaintance between the two that went back years, from the time when Shahar worked together with Oshri in Triple C starting in 2002 or thereabouts. Shachar was already serving as a salesman in the face of a civil appeal and did a good and professional job to Oshri (p. 4291, paras. 1-11). Shachar's experience also included work in Triple C and Bynet (p. 2612, paras. 13-17). Against the background of this experience and the early acquaintance between the two, Oshri recruited Shahar to work in Wei so that Shahar would work mainly with the defense industries. There, Oshri testified, we are dealing with demanding customers and work processes that are not short (p. 4291, paras. 1-13).