Similarly, the very fact that the deceased broke/cracked the windshield of the defendant's car, which is not in dispute, is consistent with Tawfiq's version, for what reason does the deceased have to damage the defendant's car if, as the defendant claims, he did not quarrel with him? The question is sharpened in light of the defendant's version (in some of his statements), according to which he was the one who separated the two.
The defendant's argument that during the quarrel between Tawfiq and the deceased, the latter accidentally broke the window pane (although it cannot be completely ruled out in terms of its physical feasibility), on the face of it, does not make sense, since cracking a car windshield with the palm of your hand is not a trivial matter and requires the application of strong and focused force and not accidental contact (it is not for nothing that in some cars you can find a hammer to smash the windshield of the car in an emergency, and similarly, see the examiner's book regarding the minimum speed required for breaking a car windshield in a car accident as a result of hitting a pedestrian, which stands at least 40 km/h).
Moreover, in contrast to the defendant who tried to claim that a considerable period of time had passed since the incident in the washing and until the deceased was run over, Tawfiq stated in all his statements that the vehicular incident took place shortly after the confrontation in the wash (a few minutes). This version is verified by the security camera footage, which shows that the defendant is waiting almost chronologically for his brother's arrival and later boards the Dodge, which is when the ramming occurs.
As to the question of whether with regard to the part of Tawfik's version relating to the threats, his version of the police should be preferred over the one in the testimony - our answer to this is positive.
Tawfiq explained that he had told the police that the defendant had threatened the deceased because he was angry with the defendant who ran over his cousin: "And if there was a possibility of attacking him, I would have attacked him in the testimony of him and I as well. What is it, it was a hot story, this is my cousin, what do you expect me to do" (p. 265).