The police filed two indictments against a man in relation to the same act. According to the indictment, the defendant assaulted a woman with whom he was in a relationship, after she demanded that he return the money she had lent him.
The complainant was engaged in, among other things, selling accessories for events, and a marital relationship was formed between her and the accused, which began with a business meeting between the two in her apartment for the purpose of purchasing accessories. During this period, the defendant took many accessories from the complainant and borrowed several thousand shekels from her.
Documentation: Woman stabs her ex-boyfriend in Jaffa (Archive) // Police Spokesperson's Office
After the relationship ran aground and the complainant demanded that the defendant repay the debt, she went to his apartment, where she informed him that she did not intend to leave his home without receiving the debt. The defendant ordered her to leave, and after seeing that the complainant refused to leave, he went into his house and took out a loudspeaker and a hat that belonged to her. The complainant replied that she also wanted her money and entered the defendant's house and informed him that she did not intend to leave until she received her money.
Then, according to the police prosecution, he pushed her and she fell and was hit in the head, after which she ran to the walk-in closet and closed the door. The defendant took out 1,000 shekels and handed it to her, but was not satisfied with this, and according to the prosecution he pushed her again. For the acts, he was indicted for threats, and after he was convicted by his own admission, another charge of assault was filed against him.
He has already been prosecuted
Through attorney Etty Gohar, who represented the defendant on behalf of the Public Defender's Office, he argued that since he had already been indicted on the matter, and the evidence in this proceeding was identical to the evidence in the threats case, he should be acquitted.
Documentation: Police arrived to rescue woman whose husband threatened to harm her - and were attacked with fireworks, stones and Molotov cocktails (Archive) // Police Spokesperson's Office
"What is delusional is that she (the complainant) came to the police to file a complaint for assault - and an indictment has already been filed for the offense of threats," Gohar said. In response, the prosecution admitted, even if not completely, that the evidence underlying the two proceedings was indeed identical, but according to the prosecution, about a month before hearing the evidence in the threats case, during a conversation with the complainant it became known that additional evidence existed, and in light of this evidence it was decided to attribute to the defendant the offense of assault as well.
Judge Elazar Bialin, who accepted the defense attorney's arguments, ordered the acquittal of the defendant due to doubt, after ruling that the evidence in the case was also weak because it was version versus version, and that the complainant's version was not without difficulties. This was partly due to investigative failures, such as the fact that it was not a police officer who documented the signs of injury but the complainant herself, as well as the failure to collect confessions from the defendant's friend and family who witnessed the incident.
Judge Bialin also noted that the main reason for acquitting the defendant is rooted in arguments of protection from justice and double jeopardy, claiming that the defendant has already been tried for his actions in the past. "The prosecution argued that at the time the original indictment was filed for the offense of threats, it did not have all the evidence to support the offense of assault. This claim I cannot accept... Because of the fact that the prosecution's explanations are convoluted, lacking professionalism and unreasonable in my opinion," Judge Bialin concluded.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us