Caselaw

Criminal Case (Jerusalem) 54589-02-17 State of Israel v. Oshri Sharon - part 251

May 31, 2026
Print

Zeiger and Harel asked to build on the conduct of Chassia from Triple C after Gilad sent her the price quote.  We have seen above that Chasia wrote to Zeiger "these numbers are problematic for me" (N/81) and that she subsequently wrote to Kashnevsky "I received bad prices" and that for this reason she would not submit a proposal to the MPR(X) Commander  (P/80, see paragraph 1014 above).  Chasia was not brought to testify.  The meaning that Zeiger and Harel sought to give to what she wrote was therefore not supported (and Zeiger's answers in his interrogation on this matter were qualified, weak, and unreliable: P/220, paras. 340-345, "maybe", paras. 368-371 "I have no idea"; When Parallel tried to claim that even when Gilad wrote to Shahar, "Submit it" (P/353), it is possible that he tried to sell the contents to Levi, even though it was clearly a matter of coordinating price quotes, para. 424).  Chassia's response that the numbers Gilad sent her were "problematic" could also be reconciled with a desire not to submit to finance too high prices in a way that could harm Triple C in the future (see and compare: Naveh's conduct in Balam Indra, at paragraph 133, and in Balam Tarp, at paragraph 420, where Naveh acted in accordance with the arrangement but in a way that can be explained in an attempt not to appear too expensive).  The weight of the words written by Chassia Leshkanovsky that she did not receive good prices is also limited.  Chasia wrote such things to Schneevsky even before the correspondence with Gilad and Zeiger and without any connection to her (see: N/80, a statement dated March 12, 2012 (13:14)), without any basis being laid for the fact that Triple C had previously tried to obtain a bid or a quote from any party or IBM; and its response can also be reconciled with a desire to present a representation of a civil appeal as if an effort was made on the part of Triple C).

In light of the above, the claims of Zeiger and Harel that the conduct with Triple C was a legitimate offer for Triple C to purchase the contents of the CBM from Harel should be rejected.

Previous part1...250251
252...286Next part