Video: Nazareth District Court acquits Roman Zadorov of the murder of Tair Rada by a majority of two to one (Judiciary Spokesperson's Office)
"In summary, it has not been proven that the defendant raped the complainant without her consent, it has not been proven that the complainant repeatedly said 'no and no,' and it has not been proven that the complainant showed any passive resistance of any kind, from which the defendant could have learned that the complainant refuses to have sex that was coordinated between them," concludes the verdict written by the Vice President of the Nazareth District Court, Asher Kolla, known to the public for his acquittal of Roman Zadorov, was joined by judges Danny Sarfati and Renana Galpaz Mokadi.
The verdict, of course, became fertile ground for supporters and opponents of the legal revolution alike. Constitution Committee Chairman MK Simcha Rotman shared a tweet by attorney David Peter, an investigator at the Kohelet Forum, who wrote about the collapse of the case because of the State Prosecutor's Office and not the reform - but Rotman did address it and tweeted himself: "There is no doubt that reform is needed in the judicial system, only here we are not talking about reforming the appointment of judges. These are those parts of the reform that cannot be advanced without addressing the grounds of reasonableness and the status of the Attorney General. Any audit or oversight body of the State Attorney's Office will be neutered without fundamental change in these areas."
Acquitted the sex offender. Asher Kola (Photo: Reuven Castro)
On the other hand, anonymous user Or Carmi, who often identifies with the prosecutor's position in his tweets, tweeted: "A panel of judges of the Nazareth District Court, headed by Vice President Asher Kolla, today acquitted a defendant accused of rape. I suppose I'll write more about it, but in the meantime I'd love help: When does an acquittal of the same panel of judges bring the truth to light (and therefore "reform is needed"), and when does it prove that the judicial system is rotten (and therefore "reform is needed")?"
Forgive me for not wanting to link the verdict to the reform (as of now there is no connection, since the reform does not deal with criminal law at all) but with the story itself. The court did not accept the prosecution's version that it was rape and preferred to criticize the defendant's version that it was consensual sex. The main reason for this is the court's finding that the woman's testimony was unreliable and incoherent.
I won't go into all the details, but I do want to insist on one legal principle: in a criminal trial, a vote of reasonable doubt is sufficient to acquit an accused. The judges learned this doubt, among other things, from the fact that the defendant had exposed his penis to the woman in the past, and therefore it is impossible that she did not complain about it. "It is unreasonable for an 81-year-old woman, who is exposed on the street of a city to expose a stranger's penis to her, and as she puts it 'in the middle of the road,' to go over this, not shout, not turn to other passersby and warn them, call the police, her children and more. Even more puzzling, is it inconceivable that a woman, again 81 years old, would later bring someone into her home who snuggled in her face, allegedly without her consent, and after she was shocked by this?"
More in Walla!
The judge who acquitted Zadorov acquitted a sex offender of raping an 82-year-old Holocaust survivor
See full article >
It was not proved that the accused raped the complainant without her consent. The suspect who was acquitted (Photo: IPS Spokesperson's Office)
This is what Judge Kola wrote, but in my view, it is also reasonable that the woman may have wanted to have sex at first and regretted it afterwards, or that we are facing a weak woman (a Holocaust survivor) who could not withstand the pressure.
Contrary to the words of Judge Kolla, who wrote: "These allegations of the complainant are manifestly unreasonable. Of course, I am not ignoring the mental state of victims of sexual offenses, and I will discuss this below, but at this stage nothing has actually been done to the complainant, she also does not appear 'frozen' or helpless, and her behavior in this regard remains without any real explanation." The woman's testimony as described in the verdict presents the situation of a woman in a difficult mental state, and in my view it is also reasonable (that a woman and a man, by the way) who is in shock from the situation will take her a while to understand what is happening in the first place. It is the job of the State Prosecutor's Office to explain the situation clearly to the court – and in this it failed.
The Northern District Prosecutor's Office's response: "The indictment for rape was filed according to the credible testimony of the complaining woman, and in accordance with all the supporting evidence. We will study the verdict and consider our steps."
- news
- News in Israel
- Criminal & Legal News
Tags
- Nazareth District Court
- Sexual Offenses
- rape
- Holocaust survivors