Conversation No. 1280, dated 12 February 2008 at 10:17 a.m., in which Arik reassured the defendant that there was already a confirmation at the bank. The defendant claimed in response that he was only the contact person and that he had "driven" him crazy (p. 587).
- Conversations from November 1, 2018:
Conversation No. 1810 and Conversation No. 1812 of November 1, 2018 (the day of the defendant's arrest), in the evening, between the defendant and Zub. In the first conversation, the defendant told Bazov that the defendant had been arrested, Bezov said that he needed to see her urgently, and the two talked about having "been" him in the office (the interrogators also arrived at the change that morning). In the conversation No. 1812, the defendant told Bezov that she might be being monitored, and the two continued to try to coordinate a meeting between them.
Charge 4 - The accuser's summaries
- The accuser referred to Arik's testimony regarding the defendant's demand to inflate 10 percent of the price quotes in order to pay the defendant, and regarding the payment of NIS 70,000 in cash and the balance in checks, due to fear of the defendant and a desire to ensure his continued work with the IPS. It was claimed that this was a method of bribery identical to that described by Reuven Gonen and Roni Coffey. Arik had no interest in incriminating the defendant, and he himself was convicted in a separate indictment in the case.
- The accuser referred to external evidence that in her opinion strengthens Arik's version – the messages that Arik sent to the defendant on May 22, 2017 (P/76): "Thank you... We will meet about everything, everything," and then "order accounts and calculations." In his testimony, Arik explained that these were calculations regarding the payment of bribes to the defendant.
The accuser also referred to the concentration of the total work carried out by Arik as a main contractor under the defendant as a construction officer during the period relevant to the indictment, in the amount of NIS 1.42 million (P/173, there were additional works as a subcontractor); inflating the work order for the waterproofing of the roof of Ayalon Prison (P/77); dictating the price quote in relation to the sealing work at the entrance to the Tel Aviv Detention Center (Conversation No. 163; Oppenheim's testimony and the additional evidence regarding the measurements he carried out in the field); In the Tel Aviv Detention Center project, the defendant served as a conduit and control factor between the IPS, the main contractor (D.B.S. Tavorinsky) and the executing contractor (Gomaitum); Clear evidence proving that the transfer of the checks of a main contractor to the subcontractor was done through the defendant.