Court Rules Insufficient Evidence for Murder Charges Against Two Women in Binyahu Razi Case
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
The Jerusalem District Court ruled there is insufficient evidence for murder charges against Agam Tzarfi and Shilat Huta in the Binyahu Razi murder case. The court found evidence for aiding and abetting murder and ordered a review for their release. Razi's family strongly condemned the decision as "absurd and irresponsible," while the defendants' lawyers welcomed it, stating their clients were not involved in the murder plot.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Court found insufficient evidence for murder charges against Agam Tzarfi and Shilat Huta.
- The judge noted only prima facie evidence for aiding and abetting murder.
- The court ordered a review for the release of Tzarfi and Huta.
- Razi's family called the decision "absurd and irresponsible."
- Defendants' lawyers stated the court accepted their argument of no involvement in the murder plot.
A Jerusalem District Court has ruled that there is insufficient evidence to support murder charges against Agam Tzarfi and Shilat Huta in the case of Binyahu Razi's murder. The decision came during a hearing on the prosecution's request to extend the detention of the two women until the conclusion of legal proceedings, not as part of the main trial. Judge Presky noted that there is only prima facie evidence for aiding and abetting murder and ordered the two to undergo a probation service review for potential release.
The proceedings were held behind closed doors due to the involvement of minors. The court determined that Tzarfi and Huta did influence minors and Aviur Sasson to harm Razi, directing them to the apartment, with Huta even letting them in. However, the judge stated that the two women were not part of the inner circle or essential to the act itself, and that there is a evidentiary difficulty in proving the required mental state for murder.
The court's decision has sparked significant anger from Razi's family, who called it "absurd and irresponsible." They accused the defense attorneys of cynically exploiting the ruling and stated that Tzarfi, Huta, and other involved parties should remain incarcerated for societal protection. "Any other decision contradicts morality and the conduct of a proper state," the family declared.
Conversely, the defendants' legal representatives expressed satisfaction. Attorneys Roni Polițți and Omri Stern, representing Tzarfi, stated the court accepted their argument that Agam was not part of the murder plot and did not desire the victim's death. Tzarfi's defense also complained of "harsh and humiliating treatment" by the prison service. Shilat Huta's attorney, Amit Weitzman, echoed this sentiment, asserting that the prosecution could not prove any intent to kill on Huta's part, let alone murder under aggravating circumstances, calling the ruling a "hard blow to the prosecution's thesis."
Mentioned
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Left 1Centre 6Right 4Other 1
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
