Key Document Emerges in Netanyahu Trial During Ex-AG's Testimony
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified in Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, where a 2016 protocol presented by the defense indicated specific initial investigation parameters for Ari Harow. Mandelblit confirmed the protocol showed specific authorizations, but also stated broader investigations were later approved. The defense questioned the absence of key recordings and alleged information leaks to journalist Ben Caspit, while Mandelblit denied external pressure influenced the indictment in Case 4000.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- A 2016 protocol presented in court specified initial investigation parameters for Ari Harow, according to Netanyahu's defense.
- Former AG Avichai Mandelblit confirmed the protocol showed specific authorizations were given for the investigation.
- Mandelblit stated that while initial instructions were specific, broader investigations were later approved.
- The defense raised concerns about missing key recordings and alleged information leaks to journalist Ben Caspit.
- Mandelblit denied claims that external pressure influenced the decision to indict in Case 4000.
During the fifth day of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's testimony in the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a 2016 protocol was presented that attorneys for Netanyahu argued significantly clarifies the scope of initial investigations. Attorney Amit Haddad presented the document, which he stated explicitly defined the identity of the investigated individual, Ari Harow, and the subject of the investigation at its outset. Mandelblit confirmed that the authorizations for the investigation were not granted broadly.
The defense team highlighted that the protocol indicated Mandelblit's specific instructions to begin with Ari Harow, stating "starting with Ari Harow at 2000 not under warning." Haddad emphasized that this meant the investigator knew precisely who to question, about what, and their legal status. Mandelblit agreed that the protocol showed specific authorizations were given, stating, "here you see it."
However, Mandelblit also clarified that while initial instructions were specific, further authorizations were later granted for investigating additional matters, suggesting the investigation was not limited solely to Harow. This distinction is central to the dispute, with the defense claiming the police exceeded the initial framework and Mandelblit maintaining that broader investigations were subsequently approved.
Further questions arose regarding recordings that the defense claims are crucial but were not provided in the investigation materials. Haddad suggested that Mandelblit's own past statements indicated that key recordings presented an inaccurate picture. Mandelblit stated he recalled recordings but not their content or who made them, acknowledging that if transcripts were intended to mislead, it would be a serious matter, though he was unaware of such an intent.
The testimony also touched upon alleged information leaks to journalist Ben Caspit. Mandelblit expressed a "feeling" that Caspit might have been receiving information from the police during the investigation period. The defense also raised the issue of the decision to indict in Case 4000, with Haddad suggesting Mandelblit initially intended to close the case but changed his mind under pressure. Mandelblit firmly rejected this, asserting that all legal decisions were made solely by him.
Mentioned
