Netanyahu's Lawyer Presents Protocol, Sparking Heated Exchange with Prosecution
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
During Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, his attorney Amit Haddad presented a confidential protocol regarding investigations into Case 1000, leading to a heated confrontation with the prosecution. The dispute focused on whether former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit authorized investigations into specific items like cigars and champagne or broader gift-receiving suspicions. The defense claimed the prosecution misled them, while the prosecution argued the defense took a document out of context. The judges had to intervene to calm the courtroom.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Netanyahu's attorney presented a confidential protocol, sparking a major dispute with the prosecution.
- The argument centered on whether former AG Mandelblit approved investigating cigars and champagne.
- The defense accused the prosecution of withholding and misrepresenting documents.
- The prosecution countered that the defense took a document out of context.
- The heated exchange in court required intervention from the judges.
During the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his attorney Amit Haddad presented a confidential protocol related to approvals for investigating suspicions in Case 1000. The core of the dispute centered on whether former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit had authorized investigations into "goodwill" gifts or specifically into cigars and champagne. The presentation of the document led to a fierce argument and shouting match in court between the defense and the prosecution, with each side accusing the other of misrepresenting the facts.
Haddad questioned Mandelblit about the exact scope of his approval, particularly regarding cigars and champagne. Mandelblit stated he authorized the investigation of significant gift-receiving suspicions, both in Israel and abroad, distinguishing between substantial gifts and minor ones that wouldn't lead to an indictment. When Mandelblit denied approving the investigation into cigars and champagne, Haddad presented a protocol excerpt that the defense claimed was not previously provided, suggesting the investigation should extend beyond just significant gifts.
The debate then shifted to how Mandelblit's decisions were documented. Mandelblit explained that his directives were typically summarized in meeting protocols. Haddad challenged this, pointing out that only nine protocols were given to the defense, despite dozens of discussions. Mandelblit maintained these nine represented meetings where official decisions were made to open investigations, and that prosecutors and assistants were involved in filtering the materials. When Haddad accused them of hiding information, Mandelblit vehemently denied it.
The exchange intensified when prosecutor Yechiel Gildin strongly objected to Haddad's presentation of the protocol excerpt, calling it taken out of context. Gildin argued that the prosecution had previously provided other excerpts where Mandelblit explicitly approved investigating gifts and summoning witnesses, and that Haddad's quote referred to an old, specific incident. Haddad reacted angrily, calling the prosecution's claims a lie and accusing them of misleading the court. The judges intervened to calm the heated atmosphere, leaving the interpretation of the protocols a deep point of contention.
Mentioned
