About three months ago, a video was posted of a brother and sister, Yitzhak and Sapir Damri, young men from Bat Yam, who are seen mercilessly beating a disabled man with his crutches after crashing into his car. In light of this, the court ruled a conditional release regarding Sapir's vehicle, after announcing that the vehicle was used to commit the offenses, thus allowing the police to argue at the end of the proceedings for his forfeiture for those offenses.
According to the indictment, the two are seen crashing into the disabled man's car, quickly getting out of their vehicle and attacking him. He tried to defend himself with the crutch with which he travels due to his disability, but at a certain point they managed to pull him away and hit him with the same crutch. Sapir allegedly crashed the victim's car and, together with her brother, attacked him after he asked to exchange details with them.
The accused then got into her car, left the scene and got on the crutch that was lying next to the complainant at the time. While the complainant asked the brother to stay until the police arrived, he threatened him "if you complain about us, I will find and kill you" and fled.
Watch: Brother and sister get out of car and beat disabled driver with crutches // Credit: Police Spokesperson's Office
The police prosecution unit, which seized the vehicle, asked the court for conditions for its release so that at the end of the proceedings they would be allowed to claim forfeiture. The defense argued at the hearing that according to Sapir Damri, the complainant was the one who attacked her and strangled her first, and asked to release the vehicle unconditionally, since they claim that the incident of the assault has no relevance to the vehicle.
On the other hand, a representative of the prosecution unit claimed that the vehicle was a means of committing the offense and the video shows the defendant speeding towards the vehicle, which led to the incident.
The judge, who accepted the police's request, ruled that this is not our case solely for traffic offenses, and after the incident of assault, the applicant returned to her vehicle and drove recklessly and negligently by speeding up her vehicle towards the complainant while he was lying on the road, and then also mounted her vehicle on the crutch that was on the road.
The judge added that although the applicant went to the police, in her first version she refrained from giving facts regarding her involvement in the incident, in fact her entire version was that the complainant attacked and strangled her, and she herself defended herself and did nothing. "The defendant's version is inconsistent with the evidence in the case, which clearly indicates that she assaulted and beat the complainant with a crutch and that she and the other are seen in the video attacking the complainant together. In light of the above, and given that the seized vehicle was used by the applicant to commit the offenses attributed to her, even if in part, I do not believe that it is possible to order the release of the vehicle unconditionally," Judge Miri Hart Ritz noted in her decision.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us
