Ex-AG Mandelblit Denies Knowledge of Nir Hefetz Interrogation Tactic
Translated & summarized from Srugim by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified in court that he was unaware of an interrogation tactic used on Nir Hefetz. Netanyahu's attorney presented evidence suggesting Mandelblit knew about the tactic, which was approved in a meeting with a prosecutor and a judge. Mandelblit also admitted he did not review all the evidence submitted in the case.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified he was unaware of an interrogation tactic used on Nir Hefetz.
- Netanyahu's attorney presented a document indicating Mandelblit knew about the tactic's approval meeting.
- The meeting approving the tactic was attended by prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh and judge Tzipi Gazit.
- Mandelblit admitted he did not review all 315 Walla news articles submitted as evidence.
- The testimony occurred during the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified Sunday at the Jerusalem District Court, where he was questioned by Amit Haddad, the attorney for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Haddad focused on police investigative actions and Mandelblit's oversight of them. Mandelblit stated he was unaware of the "improper pressure" exerted on Nir Hefetz during an interrogation tactic, referring to it as a "tactic" he did not know about.
However, Haddad presented a document suggesting Mandelblit was aware of the interrogation tactic. The document indicated that a discussion approving the tactic, which involved an associate of Nir Hefetz, was attended by prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh and judge Tzipi Gazit. Mandelblit acknowledged under questioning that he had not reviewed all 315 Walla news articles submitted as part of the indictment, nor the full appendix.
This testimony is part of the ongoing trial where Netanyahu faces charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. The interrogation tactic involving Hefetz, a former media advisor to Netanyahu, has been a point of contention in the proceedings.
Mentioned
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Centre 1Right 1
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
