When the examiner is confronted by the"The defendant, whose job it is to gather evidence and not to give interpretation to the testimonies of witnesses, testified:
"I disagree with him, witnesses see a certain case in a fraction of a second from different angles, about the examiner after he has planned (Z.L. - Integrating - A.H.B.) all the findings, to understand what they saw, as the defense attorney showed me in the previous hearing, is to deny, quantify or confirm, or in plain Hebrew - when a witness says that the accident was in their lane, on a two-way road, one lane in each direction, when he is behind the victim's car and the defendant's car comes in front of him, then my interpretation is that the accident is head-on." (See his testimony of February 6,2025, p. 87, paras. 1-5).
The examiner testified again that he relied on the testimony of the witness Ayalon ZadokIn his words:
"Q. Even though he describes the accident in a completely different way than you determined?
A. I know what he told me. After two and a half years, he may have completed a few things from memory. As for the accident, I said that this is what Ayalon Zadok thinks or sees.
I'm willing to showThe court and those present to see a car accident and concentrate, and I promise you that after I ask everyone here after the video, they will not know how to answer 3 out of 4 questions, because a person is driving on a dark, wet road, unfamiliar to him, notices the accident in front of him when the whole incident happens in a split second, he will understand the main points that he analyzes and draws the conclusions.
The examiner must take the main points that a witness sees in such a situationto match what he sees on the ground and then determine whether what the witness saw could be." (See his testimony of February 6,2025, p. 91, paras. 11-19).
As for the testimony of the eyewitness Ayalon Zadokthat the woman involved was making a left swerve at the time of the accident, the examiner testified:
"I explained this in the previous hearing, that the left deviation of the vehicle involved, which Ayalon describes in his testimony, can result either from a really quick reaction of the driver, which is less likely, or from a movement because the defendant's vehicle collides with the vehicle involved at an angle, giving the vehicle involved an angle, and when the vehicle involved is thrown to the side, and in fact its front is turned to the right and the rear is turned to the left.
...
Q. Why isn't it written in the examiner's report in the first place?
A. If I thought that the left turn was relevant to the accident, I would have commented. Even when the vehicle involved veered to the left, it still performed every action in its lane." (See his testimony of February 6,2025, p. 92, paras. 1-11).