Criminal Case (Jerusalem) 54589-02-17 State of Israel v. Oshri Sharon - part 39

Indeed, Oshri testified that they (Wee) worked with the client-Elta, met with Mordechai and characterized the project even before the request for quotations was sent (p.  4461, paras.  1-4; although he later testified that the work was done within the framework of the Bluray project and not in connection with the Indra project, p.  4461, paras.  5-12; Wei had sold Indra certain equipment a few months earlier, but on a small scale and without a direct connection to the project's contents.  N/284 (17 June 2009), N/113, N/376 (6 July 2009), p.  1244, paras.  1-1245, para.  11; Testimony of Oshri A., 4454, paras.  19-22, where he noted that these were shell products; See also N/229 - SB received from IBM on September 26, 2009, i.e., shortly after the request for quotes).  However, contrary to what is claimed, according to Oshri himself, the preliminary actions carried out by Wee, including her alleged involvement in the characterization of the project, were not sufficient to ensure that Wei won it.  Oshri himself testified that in view of the technological characteristics of the project that was required by Elta, he thought that Levy had an advantage and that it would be a miss if Wei did not win it, but confirmed that "this of course does not mean that our project is ours" and "it is not in my pocket" (p.  4458, s.  16 - p.  4460, s.  6).  Beyond that, we will address in detail below the broad argument raised by the defendants on the basis of a connection that existed between the suppliers and the project personnel in a civil appeal in the early stages and prior to the request for price proposals.  In summary, it should be noted that the project personnel in a civil appeal sometimes worked with one of the suppliers, including to examine the products suitable for the project, the configurations, to characterize the system, to obtain price estimates, and sometimes also to build a pilot, when only later on, usually the procurement personnel at IAI, issued a request for price quotes to a number of suppliers.  As we will see below, the preliminary actions taken by a certain supplier vis-à-vis the project's personnel in the early stages were marketing efforts by that supplier, in an attempt to give it an advantage later on.  However, the argument that such actions ensured the supplier who carried them out the winning of the project or that against such actions there was an undertaking by the civil appeal to purchase the contents of the project from that supplier, and these actions did not deprive the civil appeal of the possibility of requesting price quotes from various suppliers and holding competition in order to obtain genuine offers and with the aim of obtaining the best price for the civil appeal (see below at paragraphs 276-284).  In any event, the argument that the request for quotations in our case was fictitious pricing should not be accepted.  This is even more true in Balam Indra.  Here we are not dealing with any commitment by ELTA.  This is because it was the Spanish company Indra, and not Elta, that ultimately purchased the equipment, after a pricing process designed to obtain an optimal price for it, and after Indra was the one who chose the Wii whose offer was the cheapest (Testimony of Mordechai, p.  1181, paras.  1-3; and see the request for quotations N/227 where it was noted that the procurement would be carried out through a Spanish company that is the final customer).