Two recent rulings in the Supreme Court demonstrate distorted working methods of the police, which in their eagerness to capture criminals themselves create offenses and offenders. In both cases, had it not been for the police initiative, no offenses would have been committed at all.
In the first, to enforce a ban on the sale of alcohol to a minor, police sent a 17-year-old boy to purchase a bottle of beer. The seller, Benjamin, did not ask him for an ID because he estimated he was "at least [25] years old. He came with a hat and had bristles inside." The sophistication of the police required five legal proceedings, in all three instances. The justice of the peace in Ashdod, Schwartz, did indeed win correctly, ruling that the seller has "protection from justice" in view of the unfairness of the police, who used as a dishwasher agent in a minor with the appearance of an adult. But the three district judges in Be'er Sheva accepted the prosecution's appeal and convicted Benjamin. Opinions were divided at the top. Judge Handel acquitted the seller, properly, on the basis of his interpretation of the mental element in the offense. But he remained in the minority and the majority judges convicted. Interim Summary: 7 judges, 5 proceedings and a waste of our tax money, to capture a normative business owner in committing a borderline case of a non-serious offense. We must also pay the salaries of police investigators and prosecutors. Isn't it better to invest enforcement resources elsewhere?
In the second case, the police used a dishwasher, a dangerous criminal whom she released from prison, gave him money, and even included him in a witness protection program and sent him abroad - all to help her indict a drug addict named Emil, whom the criminal agent himself offered to indict. Hence, the cops themselves are the ones who traveled abroad, at the expense of our tax money, and purchased drugs from a foreign courier. It was the criminal agent who approached Emil, took advantage of his weakness as a drug addict and asked for his help, and all Emil's contribution to the offense was that he gave the criminal agent the details of the seller abroad. After the police smuggled the criminal agent to Thailand, he was arrested for murder. The eyes and not to believe.The police released from prison a dangerous criminal, allowed him to continue to commit crimes abroad, all to help her incriminate Emil, who in court himself states that he has no aggravated criminal record.
And after all that, the Supreme Court justifies, for some reason, the district court's ruling that the dismissal does not justify dismissing the charge as "defense of justice," and not acquittal but only mitigation of punishment, from five and a half to four years in prison.
As Nietzsche wrote: "Spying, deceit, bribery, ambush, all the cunning and trappings of the police and the prosecution ... and all these are acts that the judges do not reject and condemn on their own, but only in certain circumstances."
In the report of the Prosecutor of the Prosecution, the retired judge Rosen pointed out the phenomenon of police lies to the arresting judges. Hillel Partuk recently wrote in Haaretz:
'Culture of Lies' I have called this more than once.
The police do not lie, but there are employees who lie.
Why?
Because they can.
They control the information, they wear the uniform and have the authority. "
When judges allow police officers to lie to citizens and see their lies as "legitimate investigative tricks," they ignore the fact that this establishes a false culture. When practicing lying to civilians, and even teaching a teenager to lie to the police, it is no wonder that some police officers get used to lying, mistakenly thinking that the end justifies the means, and sometimes lie to prosecutors, judges and the public as well. The study shows that police lies have led to quite a few convictions of innocents. The subculture of lies must be uprooted, otherwise most lies make it difficult to really discern.