The Prosecution Case
Testimony of Yossi Yaakov (transcript of July 13, 2021)
Main Inquiry
- Yossi is a renovation contractor, who knew the defendant through a supplier of building materials, several years before his testimony, and had performed a number of work with him in the IPS. After getting to know him, the defendant called him and told him that he had a job for him in the IPS. The witness testified that all the conduct was only with the defendant, and that he did not know any other party in the system – neither IPS officials nor contractors (pp. 134-135). He himself was a subcontractor and all the conduct was with the defendant (p. 135). The witness had about five IPS projects. In general, the defendant invited him to work, he gave the defendant a price quote and went to carry out the project. After the work was completed, he waited between 30-45 days for a check (p. 135). The check belonged to Abu Jaafar or Mahlab, the main contractors, but he did not know them and never met them. He physically received the check from the defendant (p. 136). When he received the check, he filled out a receipt tax invoice (p. 136).
- During his interrogation with the police in November 2018, the witness confessed that as part of his work at the IPS in 2015, he took an additional NIS 3,000 for private work he had done for the defendant. ( 136-137). During the execution of a project at the IPS, he sometimes met the defendant. The defendant suggested that he do the work of gluing bricks in his home, which the defendant had brought. The defendant quoted the price of NIS 3,000 (p. 139). The defendant was not present during the work, which lasted about two days, and told Yossi that he would pay him later. Yossi was supposed to receive about NIS 58,000 for his work in the IPS. In practice, he received a payment of NIS 61,070 for his work in the IPS, which included payment for private work in the defendant's home (p. 139).
- P/40 - The witness's bookkeeping card, in which a transaction dated 13.12.2015 appears, on the last page, under the details "Mahlab Development and Construction" - the sum of NIS 60, 170.94. This work was on a date close to the private work at the defendant's home (p. 141). The defendant gave him the check, the witness never met Mahlab (or Abu Ja'far) ( 141-142). The witness arrived at the defendant's office in Ramle after the defendant called him, and the defendant told him that he had added the brick work to the amount of the check. The witness was surprised, he did not know that he would be paid for the brick work in this way. He filled in the details of the tax invoice at that time. He had not previously received a notice regarding the amount to be paid or a copy of the check. In all the checks that the defendant gave him, of the contractors from Aleppo and Abu Ja'far, he did not receive information in advance (p. 142). The witness admitted that it was a mistake on his part to accept payment for the brick work as part of the check that was given to him for his work in the IPS. According to him, this was forced upon him and he was afraid of losing the entire amount of the check due to NIS 3,000 (p. 143).
- In 2018, the witness's relationship with the defendant was good, until it ran aground. During that year, the witness no longer worked for the IPS. He did another private job in the defendant's penthouse – the consolidation of two bedrooms, a work of about ten days. When the work was completed, the witness detailed to the defendant's wife the amount to be paid, and she claimed that she did not need to pay him, for various reasons. About two years later, the dispute reached the court, and the court ruled in favor of the witness. The defendant paid him NIS 21,000 plus NIS 4,000 in expenses ( 143-145).
To the question of whether he was defaming the defendant in this proceeding because of that financial dispute, the witness replied that there is no connection between the two things. In this proceeding, he confesses to something improper that he himself did and he knows that he is going to pay a price for it. He would not have complicated himself because of the financial dispute (p. 146).