Judge Rosen's report reveals: A man charged by police with a cumulative sentence of 25 years in prison has been released due to sloppy management of the case.

• Photo // Oren Ben Hakun

Police negligence: From a foreclosure report by Judge David Rosen, the Ombudsman for State Representatives in the courts, it appears that the Israeli police have sought to extend a citizen's arrest after attributing him to offenses with the cumulative penalties of up to 25 years in prison, and even presenting to the court. A confidential report, which was to justify his arrest, however, when a police officer was asked by the court what indications linked the citizen to the acts to which he was assigned replied: "I have no answer" - and the suspect citizen was released.

Commissioner of Public Prosecutions for State Representatives, Judge David Rosen, handed over to the Chief of the Police Investigations and Intelligence Division a detailed report describing how the police petitioned the court to arrest a man without showing him anything to suspect, and even used him for detention in a confidential report Empty content relevant to his arrest.

Rosen's findings were based on a complaint filed by lawyer Pinchas Fischler in which he charged with an arrest warrant in the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court. The findings of the investigation revealed that it was a serious criminal case that contained information that established a reasonable suspicion that the suspect was involved in a criminal act and should therefore be arrested. However, it was found that the conduct of the police was cumbersome and negligent. The police investigation revealed that this is a complex case that includes quite a bit of investigative material, and one that does not allow arrests to be recognized best before the court hearing. The case, it turned out, was managed by an investigative officer from Jaffa Station, who during the weekend prior to bringing the suspect to court was on vacation, and was therefore not involved in writing the confidential report and did not speak to anyone who wrote the report.

The confidential report was written by an investigator without an officer passing it, and a perusal of the report turned out to be neither a finding nor a clear indication of the suspicions and intelligence gathered. The detainee also went over the case before the court hearing, but given the multiplicity of information and the difficulty of understanding what information is attributed to the suspect whose arrest he wanted to extend - the plaintiff failed to explain to the court the connection between the suspect and the offense he attributed. "In clarifying your complaint," Rosen noted in response to the complaint, "there is a disruptive and disturbing occurrence." The confidential report was written by an investigator in an exhaustive and unexamined manner by an officer, apparently in view of the fact that he was on vacation and severed contact. "

Judge Rosen adds that this is an unacceptable conduct. "A negligent confidential report recorded by an investigator without an officer investigating him is forwarded with an investigation file to make arrests without anyone asking to discuss the case, and the reason why the arrest of the detainee is sought for five days." The Court, "adds Judge Rosen," He was asked to extend the detention of a suspect on the basis of a document that does not even show why the court should order the extension of a suspect's detention, and not any person handcuffed to the courtroom. "

As mentioned, the report containing recommendations for the implementation of complex cases before their arrival in court, Rosen passed to the head of the Investigations and Intelligence Division, and, if necessary, to give effect to the police orders.