Netanyahu's Lawyer Clashes With Former AG Over Case 1000 Investigation Timeline
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, presented evidence suggesting the police lacked explicit approval to investigate gifts from Arnon Milchan in June 2016, a key point in Case 1000. Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit stated he did not recall specific details but authorized broad inquiries. The defense argues this lack of early operational approval supports their case, while the prosecution maintains broader issues were discussed.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Netanyahu's lawyer claims police lacked approval to investigate Arnon Milchan gifts in June 2016.
- Investigator Koresh Benor testified police did not have explicit approval for Milchan probe then.
- Former AG Avichai Mandelblit cited no memory of specific decisions but authorized broad probes.
- The defense argues lack of early operational approval is crucial for their case.
- The prosecution insists broader issues, including gifts, were discussed in June.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, presented testimony from police investigator Koresh Benor during a cross-examination, suggesting that in June 2016, the police lacked approval from the Attorney General to investigate gifts from businessman Arnon Milchan. Haddad argued that while the police were aware of suspicions and sought authorization for investigative actions, the Attorney General did not permit them to proceed.
During the proceedings, Haddad highlighted a June 26, 2016, meeting where the police presented suspicions related to Netanyahu. Benor testified that Milchan's name was known and appeared on a list submitted for approval, but he unequivocally stated that the police did not have explicit approval to investigate the Milchan matter at that time.
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, when questioned, did not recall specific details of the decisions but maintained that he had authorized broad inquiries into matters concerning the receipt of benefits from wealthy individuals. Haddad pressed Mandelblit, seeking confirmation that the police were denied operational approval for the Milchan investigation despite the businessman's name being known.
The defense's argument hinges on the distinction between general background checks and specific operational investigation approvals. Haddad presented an email from June 26, 2016, that mentioned Ari Harow but not Milchan, and noted the judge's observation about the lack of written documentation for alleged oral instructions. Mandelblit contended that he had approved broad probes into integrity and benefit-receiving issues.
The defense claims that the lack of explicit operational approval in the critical early stages of Case 1000, particularly concerning the gifts from Milchan, supports their argument that investigative actions were conducted without proper authorization. The prosecution, however, maintained that broader issues, including gifts, were included in the June discussions, while the judge emphasized the difference between a general review process and specific operational approvals.
Mentioned
