Prosecution Witness Claims Judges Were Shocked by Evidence in Netanyahu Trial
Translated & summarized from Srugim by baba
Dr. Yifat Ben Haim Segev, a prosecution witness in Case 4000 of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, claims that the testimony of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit exposed politically motivated actions. She stated that Mandelblit and prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh did not deny these claims and that the judges appeared shocked by the revelations. Ben Haim Segev suggested that these alleged flaws justify invoking the "defense from justice" legal doctrine in the trial.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Prosecution witness Yifat Ben Haim Segev claims judges were shocked by evidence in Netanyahu's trial.
- She alleges former AG Avichai Mandelblit's testimony revealed politically motivated actions.
- Ben Haim Segev stated Mandelblit and prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh did not deny her claims.
- She believes the alleged conduct justifies the "defense from justice" legal doctrine.
- Her claims are her personal impression and not official court findings.
Dr. Yifat Ben Haim Segev, a prosecution witness in Case 4000 of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, has sharply criticized the conduct of law enforcement in the proceedings. In an interview, she asserted that the testimony of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit revealed actions driven by political motives, aimed at achieving a political change.
Ben Haim Segev stated that Mandelblit and the prosecutor in the Netanyahu trial, Yehudit Tirosh, did not deny the claims made during the proceedings. "Mandelblit stands there, Yehudit Tirosh stands there, and they don't deny it," she said.
She also described the judges' reactions during the testimony, claiming they appeared shocked by the revelations. "I kept looking at the judges, and they were no less stunned than the people sitting in the room. The judges simply didn't know what to make of it," Ben Haim Segev stated. This observation, however, is presented as her personal impression, not an official court finding.
Furthermore, Ben Haim Segev suggested that the alleged conduct warrants the application of the "defense from justice" legal doctrine, which allows defendants to seek relief due to severe flaws in the authorities' conduct during a criminal proceeding. She believes the exposed events justify this claim in Netanyahu's trial, though her views do not represent the court's adoption of her arguments or a ruling on political motivations by law enforcement.
Mentioned
