The examiner repeated this, because the videos that the defendant submitted to the examiner were transferred to him, he watched them and he still did not see the need to summon the defendant and interrogate him again.
The examiner reiterated and confirmed, because there is no documentation of the dismantling of the computer of the defendant's car. According to him, he seized the computer together with the examiner Tal Bracha. There is no memo in the file of the examiner Tal Bracha.
He testified, because he does not have the skill to dismantle a car computer, but he can attest to the work of how it is done.
The examiner was asked, because if what the witnesses gave does not match the findings on the ground, is all that is left for him to do so, and he testified that:
"A. It's not just the grooves, you can connect the field of vision experiment to Ayalon's testimony and understand that if there was a deviation of the Kia car, he would definitely see it. In my testimony (Z.L. - Shalev - A.H.B.) he said that the accident was in their lane, that the Kia driver reacted to the accident by swerving to the left.
Q. If the Kia swerved to the left in response to the accident, does it not fit your findings that the grooves are facing right?
A. Everything happens in a very short time, it is possible that he sees the very fact of being thrown to the right as a deviation. What we describe in court as separate segments of the accident, (frames) the witness Ayalon sees it as a single piece of the accident.
Q. You just mentioned that the vehicles are front against front and then the vehicle involved is damaged to the right, no one describes a front against a front, there is not a single witness who tells you that? If it was a front against a front, I tell you that it would have collapsed on the spot, the two rear of the car would have risen in the air, landed and each one would have moved backwards, neither to the left nor to the right, certainly not in a turn. Your description of the picture is inappropriate, and so all the testimonies of the witnesses do not fit the final position of the vehicles.
A. So it's not a façade versus a façade. Façade to façade is a perfect match. In this case, the court is presented with a picture of P/33B.