The State Attorney's Office has recently completed an investigation into the 4000 case, it was revealed today (Tuesday) in the Jerusalem District Court.
However, according to the prosecution, the investigation did not raise any new material.
Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu also came to the hearing today, where the cross-examination of state witness Shlomo Pilber by Netanyahu's attorney, Adv. Boaz Ben-Zur, continues.
Netanyahu trial: Pilber's cross-examination continues // Credit: Yoni Rickner
A few days ago, a source contacted the prosecution who said that Ofer Margalit was holding correspondence with state witness Shlomo Pilber, which was relevant in his opinion to issues that arose in court.
The submitter of the information stated that he did not know if this was material that could help with a defense or a lawsuit.
Opposition leader Netanyahu arrives at court hearing, Photo: Oren Ben Hakon
Although the prosecution has correspondence between Pilber and Ofer Margalit from Pilber's cell phone, in view of the reference, it was decided in time to examine the correspondence in his possession - according to the State Attorney's instructions regarding the completion of an investigation after the indictment.
After completing the spot investigation, it emerged that the prosecution and the defense had all the correspondence to which Margalit was referring.
Margalit was a referent in the Ministry of Finance at the relevant time, and his name and correspondence with Pilber have already appeared in court, and have been published.
The development comes against the background of the State Attorney's Office's request to amend the indictment in the case, in the section concerning the "directive meeting" between Netanyahu and Pilber, who then served as the former director general of the Ministry of Communications.
After Netanyahu's defense attorney, Adv. Boaz Ben Tzur, proved through Netanyahu's diary, correspondence from Pilber's cell phone and his cell phone icons that the said meeting did not take place a week after Pilber was appointed to the position, the prosecution requested that the defendant change the letter of approval from "unknown date. Very shortly after the approval of Pilber's appointment "to an unknown date, after defendant Netanyahu decided on Pilber's appointment."
That is, after Netanyahu decided on his appointment and not after he actually appointed him.
As for the cross-examination, Pilber said in his testimony this morning: "The interrogator asked to bring material about Netanyahu. I consulted with my wife who told me 'you have nothing to bring except gossip.' I thought about the fact that I really have nothing to bring them."
Pilber added that "I felt that he (the investigator) said bring the head of Netanyahu or Elowitz, I do not know about what, certainly not about the connection between them because I did not know about it either. I feel among myself and I also consulted with my wife and said - no I really have something to bring except gossip ... I understand that Bezeq is not important to them… but I really had nothing to give them ".
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us
