Tel Aviv District Court Judge Michal Agmon Gonen dismissed evidence in the trial against a man accused of bribing a police officer, while harshly criticizing DIP investigators.
In the decision, she noted: "The visual documentation reveals a disturbing picture of the defendant's violation of the rights in a clear and explicit manner.
According to the original indictment, the defendant was charged with bribing Officer Haim Moore on two occasions.
When the police officer acted in front of the defendant and at his request, to reduce the quota of security guards at the time of the "plaque".
Initially, the policeman from the Yiftach area worked to lower the quota from 12 security guards to eight, for NIS 7,000, which he received according to what was stated in the original indictment from the defendant.
Subsequently, the officer acted to reduce the quota from eight to six security guards, for two new cellular devices provided to him by the defendant.
Defendant's partners who are the original owners of the Plaka Club, contacted the police, apparently before the defendant's interrogation, and signed state witness agreements with the accuser, and were completely absolved of responsibility.
Admitted bribery - evidence rejected, illustration, Photo: Oren Ben Hakon
The defendant admitted during his interrogation to the offense attributed to him, and he claims that the confession was given of his own free will.
Today, through Advocate Inbar Keinan of the Public Defender's Office, he denies the facts of the indictment and the offense of bribery attributed to him. Adv. Keinan argued that his confessions should be disqualified for three main reasons
: , The second, a lack of documentation of part of the interrogation, a central part of which the defendant confessed, and also due to false promises given to the defendant so that the confessions were taken from him by way of seduction and shah
.
Judge Agmon Gonen explained in the ruling why the evidence obtained by DIP when violating the law and violating the defendant's rights should be disqualified. By researcher Hadera Wilk.
In addition, the defendant was interrogated when he went out for a cigarette break for nearly two hours, initially, about an hour, without any documentation (except for a memo written by the interrogator, two days after that interrogation), and the second part, by audio only, "the judge wrote. Were aware of the need for visual documentation and avoided it. Their explanations, were not credible to me. There was no impediment to bringing the defendant back to the interrogation room and continuing his interrogation there with lawful documentation. In the case before me The voice of part of the cigarette break. "
In its decision, the judge also noted that in light of the many rulings, and the acquittals even of offenses of murder and attempted murder, there is no escape from continuing to disqualify confessions and messages collected without documentation.
"And here again we are in a situation where the provisions of the Suspicious Investigations Law are violated in exactly the same way. After four hours of interrogation (mostly without consulting an attorney), the defendant repeats his version that he did not give bribes, "Cigarette," he admits attributed to him, "the judge wrote, noting that she did not accept the prosecution's request that even if it was found that there were defects in the investigation, the court ordered the evidence to be accepted.
"There is no place for accepting the accuser's request. First and foremost, since the confession itself was not free and voluntary, it is difficult to base the verdict on it, since, it is certainly possible that it is not true. Long, and although he was denied legal representation. "
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we would love for you to share it with us