Did the defendant know about Tavorinsky's payment only in retrospect, or even before the payment? (Both versions appear in the defendant's main interrogation.)
Did the defendant know about the price that had been agreed, NIS 35,000, in advance (as stated in the defense's summaries), or only in retrospect (as he said in the main interrogation)?
The existence of different versions naturally undermines the credibility of the accused.
- In view of all of the above, I determine that the accuser met the burden of proving what is stated in the eighth charge, and that in the acts described in this indictment, the defendant, in his act as a public servant, took a bribe in the sum of NIS 35,000, in order to perform an action related to his position.
Charge 9
- During the period relevant to the indictment, Assaf Klaus (Defendant 4) served as a subcontractor in the execution of work for the IPS.
- In July 2018 or thereabouts, Hatuka performed another private job at a motel belonging to the defendant.
- The defendant contacted the cut and instructed him to falsely state in the tax invoice that the work was done for the D.B.S. for NIS 7,020.
- Later, the defendant instructed Klaus to cancel the tax invoice and note that the work was done for Klaus. In accordance with the defendant's instructions, Klaus issued tax invoice No. 1490 dated October 18, 2018, in the amount of NIS 7,070, according to which the work was performed for Klaus.
- At the same time, the defendant approached Klaus and instructed him to withdraw a check in the sum of NIS 7,070 in favor of a cut, in order to cover the defendant's personal debt. Klaus, within the framework of the dependency relationship described in the general part of the indictment and with the aim of giving the defendant a gift so that he could continue to assist him in converting jobs in the IPS and maximizing his profits as part of work for the IPS, granted the defendant's request, and gave the defendant a check with the number 10476 drawn from Klaus's bank account No. 7, NIS 070 for a future repayment date of October 18, 2018, for a cut order.
- On or about September 20, 2018, Hatuka arrived at the defendant's penthouse, and the defendant, who was abroad at the time, transferred the check to Hatuka through Olga Drozdenko, a foreign worker who lived in the defendant's home, who handed the check to Hatuka.
- In his aforementioned acts, in his act as a public servant, the defendant took a bribe in the sum of NIS 7,070, for an action related to his position.
Klaus's case has ended as stated, and therefore there is no need to detail the indictment in his case.