Ex-AG Mandelblit Cannot Recall Approving Netanyahu Bribery Probe
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified he does not recall approving an investigation into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for bribery. During cross-examination by Netanyahu's lawyer Amit Haddad, Mandelblit stated he remembers authorizing an investigation under caution but not the specific offenses. Haddad argued that key terms like "bribery" were not in the visible documents and accused Mandelblit of relying on a prepared memo. Mandelblit maintained his recollection, even as the prosecution insists on the bribery charge in Case 4000.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified he does not recall approving a bribery investigation into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
- Netanyahu's lawyer Amit Haddad argued that "bribery" and "integrity of conduct" were not in the visible authorization documents.
- Mandelblit stated he remembers authorizing an investigation under caution but not the specific offenses or exact wording.
- Haddad accused Mandelblit of relying on a preparatory memo rather than his memory of the events.
- Mandelblit acknowledged the caution wording in Case 4000 was more suited to breach of trust than bribery.
- The prosecution maintains the bribery charge in Case 4000 despite Mandelblit's testimony.
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified on Tuesday that he does not recall approving an investigation into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for bribery. During his third day of testimony in Netanyahu's trial at the Jerusalem District Court, Mandelblit stated he remembers authorizing an investigation of the Prime Minister under caution in the 'Cases of the Thousand' but struggled to recall the specific wording of the approval or the offenses included.
Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, pressed Mandelblit on the matter, presenting documents and arguing that terms like "bribery" and "integrity of conduct" do not appear in the visible portions of the authorization documents. Haddad accused Mandelblit of relying on a memo prepared for his testimony rather than his actual memory of the events, claiming, "Everything you just said is wrong."
Mandelblit insisted he remembers authorizing the investigation under caution but could not specify the exact offenses. When questioned by the judge about approving a bribery investigation, he repeatedly responded, "I don't remember." He later clarified that while he remembers authorizing investigations in the various cases, he cannot be certain of the precise wording approved for each.
The exchange became heated, with Haddad accusing Mandelblit of misrepresenting events and adopting language from a preparatory memo. Mandelblit, however, maintained he recalled using the phrase "integrity of conduct" and that the wording of the caution in Case 4000 was more aligned with breach of trust than bribery, though he had sought to maintain discretion between the two offenses. The prosecution, meanwhile, has insisted on maintaining the bribery charge in Case 4000.
