P/138 - Summary of the entries in the diary. In October 2018, about which the police learned from the wiretaps that during that month there was full occupancy, there are records of only two units that were rented for a short period of time. This led the police to understand that the diary could not be relied upon because the entry in it was partial and did not correspond to reality. In addition, there were missing pages in the diary (pp. 335-336).
- Exhibits relating to cash deposits were submitted:
P/140 - "Working Paper - Analysis of Bank Deposits of Arkadi and Natalia" - The document relates to cash deposits and checks deposits in three bank accounts of the defendants. One account of the defendant, a second account shared by both of them, and a third account of the defendant only. As to cash deposits:
In 2014, antitrust deposits of NIS 95,000,
In 2015 Antitrust 145, 120 NIS,
2016 Antitrust 214, 600 NIS,
2017 Antitrust 396, 820 NIS,
2018 until March (date of expiration of the order given to banks) – NIS 40,600.
P/140 is based on material received from the banks through the police system and converted to Excel (P/141, P/142). The investigator made a summary of the material (p. 338).
The amounts of cash deposits gave an indication that there were high cash incomes. It was taken into account that not all cash income was deposited (p. 339).
The rent from the apartment in Pardes Hanna was transferred by bank transfer and was not counted as part of the cash deposits (p. 339).
- As to the calculation of the income from the motel by means of the Tax Audit (an audit for tax purposes based on an estimated calculation of the income, Appendix A to the indictment), I do not see the need to elaborate on this matter, since the accuser noted in her summaries that she no longer relies on this calculation and on the amounts detailed in Appendix A to the indictment, and wishes to determine the scope of the income from the motel attributed to the defendants on the basis of the amounts in cash deposited in the defendants' accounts.
- As to the defendant's claim regarding cash deposits following the sale of vehicles, the matter was examined in the databases and it was found that the sale of one vehicle was made during the relevant period, in the name of the defendant or his wife, with the proceeds being transferred by bank transfer and not by cash or check (p. 342).
Cross-examination
- The investigator was not aware of affidavits that the defendant produced in the later stages of the investigations (affidavits of tenants from Russia and Israel) (p. 343). Testimonies were taken from tenants who were located, mainly long-term tenants. Most of the tenants came as part of medical tourism, they live abroad and cannot be reached. In cases of this type, there are no legal investigations (p. 343).
- The investigator insisted that according to the vehicle registry, only one vehicle was found that the defendants had sold during the relevant period. It was a standard vehicle with a bank transfer amount between NIS 100,000-200,000 or slightly more (pp. 367-369).
- The interrogator participated in the "break-in" day, searched the defendant's private home and then his office (p. 344).
The Haganah Affair