Call No. 1810 of November 1, 2018 at 21:08 (the day of the defendant's arrest) - a conversation from the day of the arrest, between the defendant and Bazov (an employee of the "Hashalom" exchange, see Charge 4). Bezov called the defendant and asked to meet with her urgently. The defendant said that the defendant had been arrested and asked Bezov: "Did they come to you too?" And Bezov replied: "Yes, they were in my office, because of that" (that's why he wants to meet with her – M.B.). To the claim that the defendant was aware of the money laundering at the exchange, she replied that there was no money laundering, but only the fragmentation of dollars through the exchange, by tourists that she referred to the exchange (pp. 605-606). When asked if Bezov had casually called her that evening, she claimed that the State Attorney's Office had chosen only one of several calls (p. 607).
Conversation No. 1812 of November 1, 2018 at 21:15 - Another conversation between the defendant and Bezov, in which the defendant says that it is not worthwhile to meet, on the advice of her lawyer, for fear of surveillance. To the claim that a spouse who has nothing to hide is not afraid of police surveillance, she replied that she was afraid because the police arrived at their home that morning (p. 609).
Conversation No. 1825 in Russian from November 1, 2018 at 21:34 - A conversation with Voba (Ziv), the defendant's son from his previous marriage, in which the defendant says that Bazov informed her about a search at Cheing and also wants to talk to her about a certain check. She confirmed, reluctantly, that she had learned from Bazov that Chewing had found checks related to the affair (transcript of September 26, 2023, p. 540, the rest of the references in the defendant's cross-examination will relate to this transcript).
Conversation No. 2840 of March 22, 2018 - between the two defendants. The defendant asks the defendant about a situation in which the bank will be asked what the deposit is about. The sums of NIS 100,000, NIS 80,000 and NIS 45,000 are mentioned in the conversation. The defendant instructs her to answer that these are income from the villa. The defendant was asked if there were deposits from the villa in the account, and she replied that they never concealed that there was income but she did not earn NIS 1 million, and that there were losses from the villa (p. 544).