Cross-examination
- In the cross-examination, the witness claimed that the defendant "did not receive a shekel from me" (p. 118). The defendant never asked him to transfer money to him and never asked him to inflate a job offer (p. 118). The defense attorney referred the witness to his interrogations at the police, in which he denied bribing the defendant and claimed that the defendant was not involved in setting a commission or in the financial matters between him and the main contractor at all. The witness stated in response that this was the truth (pp. 118-120). In view of this, and when the accuser's counsel requested it, Biton was declared a hostile witness (p. 121).
Re-investigation
- In the re-examination, the witness stated that he admitted to transferring NIS 7,000 to the defendant in order not to conduct the trial, and that in fact he did not transfer money to the defendant and lied in court (p. 123). The witness was asked about the fact that in the main interrogation he was asked to ignore the term "bribe" and confirmed that he transferred NIS 7,000 to the defendant. To this he replied that he did say what he said in the main interrogation, but did not transfer the money ( 124-125).
- The prosecutor confronted the witness with the telephone conversation with the defendant in which the witness said, "What is between you and me is to bury," with the conversation in which he told the defendant that he would go all the way to Eilat after he had written the check and brought the defendant what he needed to take care of, and with his statement in the main interrogation that it was cash as a gift that should have been brought to the defendant. The witness insisted that this was the deal with the State Attorney's Office and that the words were not true (p. 132).
- In accordance with Section 10A of the Evidence Ordinance, the minutes of the verdict were submitted (the Honorable Judge A. Kobo) of December 8, 2020 in the case of Biton (Exhibit 37), the minutes of the pleadings for sentence and sentence of February 9, 2021 (Exhibit 38), and the amended indictment in the case of Biton (Exhibit 14) (Exhibit 39).
Morris Michaeli (Transcript of March 9, 2022)
- According to the accuser's argument in her summaries, the inflating of the bill of quantities and the price quote began with the defendant's demand that Morris Michaeli, the main contractor (on behalf of M. Michaeli and Bitolit) do so. Although these facts are not detailed in the indictment, I will briefly present Morris's testimony below.
- Morris testified that he prepared bills of quantities (estimates), usually with the defendant. The defendant supervised the subcontractor and approved the bill (p. 607). Sometimes Morris received the bills of quantities and price quotes from the defendant (p. 608). There were jobs in which the defendant brought the subcontractor. In those cases, the order would go through the defendant, and everything was conducted with the defendant. There were subcontractors that the witness did not know (p. 608). The defendant was the first and last authority as far as he was concerned. If the defendant decided that it was the contractor, this was the work and this was the sum, there was no argument about the matter (p. 608). After refreshing his memory, he replied that if he had not acted as the defendant wished, he might not have continued to receive work in the IPS (p. 609).
- Exhibit P/110 is an estimate of the construction of a covered shed in the Abu Kabir Detention Center dated February 15, 2018, carried out by M. Michaeli, in the sum of NIS 185,000. In conversation No. 1648 of February 25, 2018, the defendant asked Morris to prepare a bill of quantities in the amount of NIS 180,000 (p. 614). In conversation No. 2250, dated March 8, 2018, the defendant told Morris that he had made a mistake and was now asking Morris to increase from NIS 180,000 to NIS 200,000, and Morris complied with the demand. Morris stated in his testimony that the increase was because it was the budget that the defendant could receive (p. 616). The project was carried out under the supervision of the defendant (p. 617).
- Benny Biton, a subcontractor, was known by the witness through the defendant. He worked with Biton in the Abu Kabir shed and they had no other joint projects. The witness met him no more than three times. The defendant was the one who chose Biton for the project (p. 617).
- The shed project was delayed, and in the meantime the witness gave Biton an initial advance. In his estimation, the project was completed by Passover 2018 (pp. 617-618).
- Exhibit P/112 contains a copy of check No. 6317 of M. Michaeli at the behest of Benny Biton, in the sum of NIS 77,600, due date of June 30, 2018. The inscription "To the beneficiary only" on the check was deleted. Morris testified that he agreed to take down the inscription so that Biton would not have to wait for the check to be due and could order material, etc. (p. 618).
Cross-examination
- The witness was asked whether Bitolite had become a fictitious main contractor, since M. Michaeli was actually acting in place of Bitolite. The defense attorney accused him that improper conduct on his part had motivated him to "sell" the defendant during the police interrogation in any way possible (pp. 624-641). The witness insisted that he was the contractor who represented Bitolite in the IPS and that his conduct was permissible and legal (p. 643).
- Morris did not see anything unusual in the telephone conversation in which the defendant told him that he had to raise from NIS 180,000 to NIS 200,000, and that the correction was due to additional work or things that cost more (p. 644).
The Haganah Affair