Teen Settler Sentenced to 13 Years for Killing Palestinian Woman
A minor settler, identified as "Tz," who was underage at the time of the incident, has been sentenced to 13 years in prison for the killing of Aisha al-Rabi approximately eight years ago in the West Bank. The Central District Court in Lod convicted Tz, a resident of the Benjamin region, of manslaughter.
In an unusual turn of events, the conviction came against the recommendation of the presiding judge, Vice President Liora Brodi, who had acquitted Tz of the charges due to reasonable doubt. The conviction was secured by a majority vote of the two other judges on the panel.
Tz's family, along with the Honenu organization, announced their intention to appeal the conviction and sentence to the Supreme Court. His defense attorneys, Ariel Atari and Adi Kidar from Honenu, stated that their client was convicted of a crime he did not commit, asserting that the court based its decision on a single piece of DNA evidence found on a stone at the scene. They highlighted that international experts testified that DNA cannot be reliably recovered from stones and that the presiding judge's detailed reasoning suggests a high probability of the Supreme Court overturning the verdict.
The defense also pointed to a report by Dr. Chen Kugel, director of the National Center of Forensic Medicine, which indicated that the injuries sustained by al-Rabi were inconsistent with a single stone impact, contradicting the prosecution's case. The conviction was notably based on DNA evidence from a stone, despite expert opinions questioning the validity of such evidence.
Previously, senior rabbis from the Religious Zionist movement had criticized the Shin Bet security agency over the harsh interrogation methods used against Tz and his friends, who were ultimately not charged. Rabbi Dov Lior urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to intervene, calling for justice to be pursued fairly. Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, the chief rabbi of Safed, even called for the closure of the Shin Bet's Jewish department, accusing it of fabricating cases to justify its existence and eroding public trust.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.