"His behavior was characterized by senseless behavior, to say the least, but morals on one side and criminal behavior on the other." This is how Haifa Magistrate's Court Judge Shlomo Banjo ruled, who acquitted Superintendent Haim Sharaga, a police officer who was put on trial by the police for harassment sex of two female police officers who were under his command as commander of the control center in the coastal district.
The conversation between the two and the commander, on which Mash was based, was conducted only by text messages. However, from the judgment of Judge Benjo it appears that no action worthy of being called harassment, of the two,
was proposed by him. The decision reached by Benji coincides with Mash's explanation. Q Back in 2019, when she closed the case while reasoning that "the criminal procedure does not constitute a suitable framework for its investigation".
However, according to what was published at the time, the Public Prosecutor's Office was forced to open it again when the person who complained did not give up. He turned to the Minister of Internal Security at the time, Amir Ohana, the Minister of Justice at the time, Avi Nissenkorn, as well as the Ombudsman, retired judge David Rosen - who started an in-depth investigation process , in which the head of the Department of Defense, attorney Keren Bar Menachem, addressed the
allegations of a cover-up.
There is no room for choice," Bar Menachem insisted.
However, Mahesh was dragged into filing the indictment and a trial that lasted two and a half years contrary to her position, and at the end of it, as mentioned, last Thursday, the court reached the same conclusion.
"His behavior was characterized by senseless behavior, to say the least, but style and morals separately, and criminal behavior separately."/ Israel Police Spokesperson
Corporal Haim Sharaga continues to serve in the police, but with the feeling that from the beginning of the case they had already tried his case even before the trial, they turned their backs on him and did him and his family a great injustice. Those close to him are convinced that "this is a very targeted thwarting" and that "the construction of the criminal case was by a third party, Another police officer and his wife, who was a police officer of Shraga." These left the police a long time ago.
Judge Banjo accepted the argument of the defense attorney, attorney Amit Haddad, that the elements required for the elaboration of the offenses attributed to Shraga were not proven at all and states that His conclusion, "I was not required by the other claims of the learned defense attorney, regarding selective enforcement, and that the indictment filed against the defendant is precedential, in that it attributes to the defendant crimes of sexual harassment, based on statements on social platforms."
Judge Banjo even added a criticism to the Attorney General that it is doubtful whether the very filing of an indictment in Shraga's case was in line with the State Attorney's instructions.
came to the same conclusion.
M.S./Reuven Castro
A., then a 24-year-old student, was met by Sharga when she came to him for an interview in order to be accepted into the SDF. When he got to know her, he began courting her with correspondence that lasted for about two and a half months, until she started working in the SDF.
However, Judge Benjo who acquitted him states from the totality of the evidence heard that the conversation between them, both social and sexual, was on her mind and with her consent, while not only did she not show him with words or behavior that she refused to talk, but that she cooperated, sometimes developed the conversation, And sometimes she encouraged him indirectly, saying that it was a mutual flirtatious conversation, and she didn't feel bothered in any aspect.
"I didn't want to file the complaint in advance. It was out of complete reluctance," A told the court herself. That's what you want. Someone from the HQ saw the messages here and there, a situation arose that she saw the messages, I told a friend, a friend told her, that one probably has a story with Shraga, I didn't get into it, and that's how it unfolded, and a situation came up, that she She addressed the police on my behalf, she said A, B, C and police came to me and sat on the back of
my neck."
Lavina but touched on a variety of other issues, when A. shared her feelings and routine with the commander. In her testimony, she said that she did not feel bothered or hurt by his suggestions and therefore did not complain and therefore did not want to cooperate with the police and did not even testify and expressed anger at being invited to the investigation and trial.
In her testimony she even protested this, and confirmed that she felt that they had invaded her privacy, her personal life, without permission, and forced her against her will to testify in the case.
She testified that Shraga did not force anything on her, his sexual proposals were gently rejected by her, and although she sometimes felt uncomfortable, he was not abusive.
She chose to keep in touch with him, and continued to talk to him even though she fully understood that he was interested in her.
"The damage to his career is terminal."
Superintendent Haim Sharaga/official website, -
B., then a 20-year-old police officer-soldier, served in the headquarters under the command of Corporal Chaim Shraga during 2019. According to the indictment, throughout the period Shraga sent her messages with a sexual tone via messenger, Instagram and Telegram and complimented her on her appearance .
In view of his incessant responses to her posts on Instagram, she eventually blocked him and from that time on he stopped sending her messages.
In a closing remark, Judge Benjo mentioned that the defendant was an officer in the Israel Police, who was the commander of the command center, and by virtue of his position he had contact and influence with the two. , to say the least, and was inappropriate for an officer.
It should have been appropriate for the accused to avoid any contact in the style detailed in the evidence, with female police officers about 20 years younger than him, when the acquaintance is the result of his being the officer in charge of the command post. But style and morals are separate, and criminal behavior is separate."
"Unless the court is presented with an evidentiary foundation that consolidates the offenses attributed to the accused, there is no legal basis for convicting the accused of these offences," stated Judge Shlomo Banjo, "under the circumstances, given the position of the complainants, it is doubtful whether there was any room for disciplinary action."
Inspector Haim Sharaga is prevented from commenting on his acquittal by order of the Israel Police spokeswoman.
His friends say he remains embittered by the fact that he had to fight the fight of his life over a case that should not have been filed at all.
Someone who knows the case well said that "those who are familiar with the chain of events know that before there were other things and he filed two complaints with the Criminal Investigation Department for defamatory anonymous letters that reached him and included threats.
The cases were of course closed without results.
In practice, the authors and the same person who initiated the case, the judge also writes that it is an unusual case because it is a case without a complainant, achieved what they wanted since the damage to his career is terminal."
More on the same topic:
sexual offenses
M.S
sexual harassment