She asked for too light a sentence:
The prosecutor's office admitted that it was wrong about a terrorist who threw stones and Molotov cocktails at a bus during Operation Wall Guard.
The judge of the District Court in Jerusalem, Lekh Cohen, sentenced the terrorist to only three years of actual imprisonment.
"I considered the personal circumstances of the accused, who supported his family and was on the verge of marrying his fiancee before his arrest," the judge wrote.
Judge Dana Lekh Cohen,
In May 2021, Fars Jabbar met at the Flower Gate in Jerusalem with three others, who planned to attack an Egged bus carrying Jewish passengers with stones and Molotov cocktails.
When the bus arrived at the scene, the driver recognized what was about to happen, and ordered the passengers to lie down on the floor of the bus.
Then Jabbar and his friends started throwing stones and Molotov cocktails at the bus and damaged it, but failed to injure its passengers.
Jabbar was arrested and interrogated, and the prosecutor's office filed an indictment against him as part of a plea deal in which he admitted to four different offenses of terrorist activity.
The probation service stated that Jabbar refuses to express sorrow and remorse, but at the court hearing he expressed remorse to the judge.
"Miscellaneous punishment in relation to the circumstances"
The prosecution argued before the judge that he should be sentenced to an actual prison sentence of three to five years, justifying this by saying that the circumstances fit another indictment that received a similar sentence.
Only later did the prosecutor's office inform the judge that she was wrong, and claimed that it was "a punishment that is too lenient in relation to the circumstances."
Demonstration in Lod on the one year anniversary of the Guardian of the Walls events, photo: Itay Elhadez
Judge Lekh Cohen adopted the prosecution's first argument regarding the punishment, and sentenced Jabbar to only three years of actual imprisonment.
The judge emphasized his serious actions, and wrote: "The potential damage inherent in the actions was great. The actions were carried out in a sensitive, tense and stormy period, when the country was under attack."
The judge explained the decision to make it significantly easier for the terrorist: "I considered the young age of the accused and the lack of a criminal record. I also considered the personal circumstances of the accused, who supported his family and was on the verge of marriage before his arrest. I also considered the fact that the accused has been in custody for many months ".
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us
