Immediately on the next page of the transcript, in the second quote brought by Max in its claims, Mr. Shitrit says something unclear (ibid., S. 186-177):
Interrogator: Who are the tenants?
Yigal: This is Rafi Dayan's company.
Interrogator: Huh... It's Rafi and Naftali Shimshon's, it's as if Naftali Shimshon is the same.
Yigal: He sent his brother as if he were his brother.
Interrogator: It's not clear.
Yigal: His brother wasn't in it. (It's not clear). He's actually the spirit behind him.
Investigator: Naftali Shimshon is the owner. They are strong people.
Yigal: Yes, they are very strong people.
00Investigator: Nice.
0Yigal: It's not clear.
One can get the impression that the interrogator is the dominant one in the discourse. He tries to put words in Mr. Shitrit's mouth and pull him with his tongue. The interrogator is the one who mentions Mr. Shimshon as the owner. And even then, Mr. Shitrit confirms that the Shimshon family "are very strong people, " a fact whose meaning is unclear. In addition, it is precisely in this important passage that there are truncated passages that are unclear.
Moreover, later in the transcript, Mr. Shitrit explicitly states that he respects Michael's claim that Mr. Shimshon is not the owner of Superstock (ibid., at page 65, Q. 87-95, emphasis added):
Interrogator: Oh, 20 percent, Michel Haim is a bank. Just a moment did I understand, and the 20 percent that is registered in Michael's name is Naftali's.
Yigal: He... Michael says it's his as if. I respect it, but the people who work behind it...
Interrogator: Of course.
Yigal: They don't say that. I sat down with the (unclear) deal. I closed the deal. I actually sold the company to the new guys. That's the (unclear) first of all, but basically now there's a good opportunity here because we're in negotiations.
Is it possible to learn from this passage that Mr. Shitrit admits to Mr. Shimshon's ownership of the shares? The person who claims the said ownership is the investigator. And Mr. Shimshon actually says that Michael says that it is his, and he "respects it." Here, too, the multitude of truncated passages makes it difficult to fully understand the discourse that took place.