"Q.  We want to understand, you don't actually do work for Mickey or do work for Mickey?

1. In my understanding, I did do work for Mickey. But I will note that I did not forget for a moment that I came there to transfer money from Mickey to David" (P/5, at p.  3, paras.  81-83).
2. The defendant even admitted that he served as a mediator and transferred information and requests between Ganor and Sharan:

"Q.  How does the method of transferring Mickey's information and questions to David and then transferring the answers from David to Mickey work?

1. Some of the questions were asked orally. Mickey would talk to me from time to time and he would say to me, 'Tell me, 'What's going on with our friend, ' he said to me, 'Check what's going on and that's it?' This was already done at a time when David was not so available because he was at work in the Prime Minister's Office and was busy, he was less available to me..." (P/5, at p.  3, paras.  84-87).  The defendant further described that he and Sharan used to play tennis together on Fridays, and there they discussed these topics; to the interrogator's question as to whether he had received answers from Sharan, he replied that Sharan's answers were limited and laconic (P/5, at p.  3, paras.  90-91).
2. The defendant was asked by the investigators at what point the transfer of information between Ganor and Sharan came into play, and he answered:

"I don't know how to quantify this matter in time.  It was kind of an entry into a grinder.  At first it was a drop of ammonia and all sorts of things, and slowly on the timeline, it was probably relevant to submarines, and then it started to converge in the direction of the submarines, and I think it was like Mickey warmed me up on the lines and plus minus, when David took over in the Prime Minister's Office, Mickey brought me in to play on the field.

1. The rationale is that in addition to receiving the money, you also transfer information from Gonor to Sharan and from Guran about submarines?
2. Yes.  That is what interested him" (P/5, at p.  7, paras.  207-212).
3. The defendant was asked why he had decided to tell the truth now, and explained:

"Q.  Yesterday you told us other things, why did you decide to tell the truth now?

1. Because yesterday I realized that I was in fact a kind of pawn in the game and I didn't want to.  Yesterday I realized at a certain point that since the friend was the one who introduced me to Mickey Ganor and he was the one who told me that Mickey Ganor could be trusted 100% and he was the one who asked me to do the actions I did, I understood that it would not be right on my part to continue to bear the burden of protecting the friend when he himself brought about the difficult situation that exists" (P/5, at p.  7, paras.  222-227).
2. In summary, the conviction of the defendant, Tzachi Lieber, for the offense of brokering bribes under section 295(a) of the Penal Law, is based on proof of the factual and mental element required by law. The factual component of the receipt of the funds was proven by means of bank evidence and accounting documents, which attest to two financial transfers from the account of Miki Ganor's T.G.  company: the first payment in the amount of ILS 35, 400 on November 12, 2014 to the N.T.  company, and the second payment in the amount of ILS 58, 500 on August 11, 2016 to the Ness Mor company.  This offense is perfected with the receipt of the gift with the consent of the bribe's designation, and it does not matter whether the bribe actually reached its destination or whether the recipient was aware of it.
3. The component's proof that the money was given "in order to give a bribe" is based on the statements of the state's witness, Mickey Ganor, who stated explicitly and emphatically that the payments were made ostensibly for "media consulting." In practice, Lieber and his companies did not provide Ganor with any real service of any kind, and the payments were all intended to be transferred to David Sharan. The defendant himself confirmed in his interrogation that the issuance of the invoices was intended to obscure the path of the money and allow Ganor to record it as a recognized expense, and admitted that "otherwise they would not have needed me."
4. The main evidentiary evidence to prove the defendant's awareness is his version of his confession to the police on September 5, 2017, in which he admitted that he had served as a "money pipe" for transferring the money from Ganor to Sharan. Lieber refuted his initial version of "gratitude" and confirmed that he knew from his first meeting with Ganor that his job was to transfer the funds because Sharan was prevented from receiving them directly.  He detailed that he used to cash the money received, with the assistance of his partner Nati Mor, and transfer it to Sharan at his request, usually close to Sharan's trips abroad.
5. In addition to the transfer of the funds, Lieber admitted that he had served as a source of information and requests between Ganor and Sharan regarding the submarines, including during tennis games he held with him on Fridays. Lieber's awareness and motives were also supported by the "give-and-take" relationship he had with Sharan, with the understanding that he could use Sharan's senior public status to promote the interests of his clients, as happened in practice in promoting Bazan's control permit.  Ultimately, Lieber explained his decision to admit that he understood that he was "a kind of pawn in the game" and was no longer willing to bear the burden of protecting Sharan, which brought him to this difficult situation.
6. Ganor and Lieber's confessions are supported by a broad evidentiary base that includes Ganor's "table of advisors, " Ronen Shemer's work notebooks, the records of Secretary Josie Singer, cellular locations, and communications research. In addition, David Sharan's status as a public servant (or alternatively as a candidate for the position of director of the Prime Minister's Office) at the time of the transfer of the funds was fully proven by means of official documents and testimonies.  This evidence, combined with the detailed confessions, fully establishes Lieber's guilt for the offense of bribery brokerage and related offenses.

The offense of money laundering

389. The factual basis of the money laundering offense is proven by the fact that the payments transferred from Ganor to the defendant's companies (Ness Mor Holdings Ltd. and N.C.T.  Communications Ltd.) were bribe funds intended for a public servant, and therefore this is "prohibited property" that originated in the offense.  The transfer of the funds to the accounts of these companies, against invoices that appear to be true invoices (including payment of tax on the transfer), constitutes an "action in property" as defined in the law.  These actions were completed in full upon receipt and channeling of the funds in order to create a legitimate cover for the prohibited payments.
390. As far as the mental element is concerned, the awareness and the "intention to conceal or disguise" are based on the defendant's own confessions in his interrogations with the police. During his interrogation, Lieber admitted that the money he received from Ganor was not given for work or service he performed for him, but that his entire role was to transfer the funds between Ganor and David Sharan.  In his confession, the defendant confirmed that he understood that Sharan was a public servant, and that he was aware that the partition was intended to prevent the exposure of the direct connection between the payer and the recipient.
391. In addition, the defendant confirmed in his interrogation that the purpose in transferring the funds through his companies and in issuing the fictitious invoices was to "put another layer" or "another screen" between the parties to the prohibited transaction. The exchange of contracts between Ganor and the defendant, which were intended to provide a fictitious cover of true work, constitutes direct evidence of the intention to conceal it.  The defense's argument that the contracts were partial and sloppy is rejected based on the "Ta'anakh" ruling (Criminal Appeal 2333/07 Shlomo Ta'anach v.  State of Israel (July 12, 2010)), according to which even simple and overt concealment operations that are not particularly sophisticated fulfill the element of concealment required for the purpose of conviction.
392. In the defense summaries ("Defendant's Summaries"), the defense attorney refers to the issue in the chapter "Reducing the Legal Dispute". He clarifies that to the extent that it is determined that the sums that Ganor transferred to the defendant were gifted payments intended for Sharan and that Lieber was aware of this, there is no dispute that this is "prohibited property".  He also notes that if it is determined that the payments and their transfer were made in the manner detailed in the indictment, then this is ostensibly a money laundering offense.
393. Considering that I find it to be determined that the offense of bribery brokerage was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, its derivative is the determination that the offense of money laundering was also proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Offense of Fraud under the Income Tax Ordinance

394. The offense of fraud under section 220(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance is a non-consequential behavioral offense, and it is sufficient for it to be crystallized in the performance of the prohibited conduct, together with a special intention to help another evade tax. The factual element in our case is expressed in the act of issuing false invoices, which enable the preparation or maintenance of false ledgers and records in the books of Ganor's T.G.    The defendant issued invoices for funds he received, which were presented as being given for professional services, even though in practice no work or service was performed.
395. The proof of the factual basis is based first and foremost on the defendant's confession in his police interrogation (P/5), in which he confirmed that he did not perform any actual service or work for the funds transferred to him from Ganor. At the same time, the defendant admitted that despite the lack of work, he issued orderly invoices presenting these payments as payments given for the provision of services.  These invoices were recorded in Ganor's company books as recognized expenses, thus completing the element of authorization to prepare and maintain false ledgers.
396. The mental element requires awareness of the elements of the offense and a special intention to help another person evade tax, which is directly proven by the defendant's statement in his interrogation on September 5, 2017. To the investigators' question as to why Ganor needed him as a conduit for the transfer of the funds, the defendant replied: "...  I think that it is simply that Mickey, in his great miserliness, did not want to pay David S.  in cash because Mickey wanted there to be a recognized expense of the funds." This shows that the defendant was fully aware that his issuance of the invoices was intended to help Ganor make a false representation to the tax authorities in order to reduce his tax liability.
397. In the defense summaries, the defense attorney agrees and details his conceptual legal position regarding a conviction for money laundering in a case where the original offense is proven, and immediately adds: "This is true with the changes required in relation to the tax offense." This agreement is clarified and detailed in the paragraph that relates to the state's arguments regarding the accompanying offenses (which include the tax offenses and money laundering). In this section, the defense attorney notes: "There is no legal dispute that the factual component and the factual basis of these offenses will be derived from the court's determinations regarding the offense of bribery." "If it is determined that Lieber brokered bribes, it is clear that in the circumstances of the provision of an invoice and the transfer of cash, the accompanying offenses were committed."

Conclusion

398. On the basis of an analysis of the overall fabric of evidence, and based on my determinations that the defendant's petty claims should be rejected and his confessions detailed to the police should be accepted as true confessions, I determine that the defendant's guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
399. However, contrary to the accuser's position, the splitting of the charges into two separate offenses for each payment is an artificial split of what in practice constitutes a single and complete set of facts. This is a single set of facts that took place over time, in the framework of a single event based on a series of interrelated acts, until they constitute a single affair based on the same alleged and continuous connection between the defendant, Ganor and Sharan.  In fact, this is a single ongoing offense.  The division of the ongoing offense into two offenses is artificial and unjustified.
400. Reinforcement for this can be found in the wording of the indictment itself in sections 26 and 27, where the accuser consolidates and defines the actions as a single transaction: "The defendant received the first and second bestowal payments in the sum of ILS 93, 900 ." The accuser's reference to the cumulative sum as a single entity shows that this is one ongoing criminal activity, and not two separate and separate offenses as claimed in the section of the statutory provisions.
401. Therefore, I find that the defendant, Lieber, be convicted of the main offense of bribery brokerage under section 295(a) of the Penal Law, 5737-1977, for receiving the first and second bestowal payments in the total amount of up to ILS 93, 900 from Michael Ganor in order to bribe public servant David Sharan.
402. In addition, and on the basis of the same factual basis according to which the defendant served as a transit station and cover for the transfer of the prohibited bribes, I convict the defendant of the offense of carrying out an operation with prohibited property under section 3(a) of the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law, 5760-2000.
403. In addition, I find that the defendant should be convicted of the tax offense of assisting in the preparation of false ledgers and records, under section 220(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance [New Version], 5721-1961, for issuing the false invoices through his companies in order to assist Ganor and T.G. to evade tax.