Netanyahu Trial: Journalist Drucker's Condition for Police Cooperation Revealed
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
A document presented in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial revealed journalist Ravev Drucker's condition for cooperating with police: the investigation must become a formal criminal probe. Drucker expressed concerns about exposing sources during preliminary stages. Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit stated he does not recall being informed of this contact. The prosecution objected to the document's presentation, citing privilege concerns.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Journalist Ravev Drucker conditioned police cooperation on the Netanyahu investigation becoming a formal criminal probe.
- Drucker feared exposing his sources if he provided information during the preliminary review stage.
- Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit stated he does not recall being informed of the police contact with Drucker.
- The prosecution objected to presenting the document, citing potential professional privilege issues.
- The document detailed investigators' efforts to obtain correspondence related to Ari Harow from Drucker.
A document presented in the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday revealed a conversation between police investigators and journalist Ravev Drucker regarding correspondence he possessed related to Ari Harow. According to the document, Drucker expressed willingness to cooperate more extensively if the preliminary investigation into the Prime Minister were to become a full criminal probe, but voiced concerns about exposing his sources.
During the cross-examination of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, Prime Minister Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, questioned Mandelblit about his knowledge of the police's contact with Drucker. Haddad sought to establish the extent of communication channels between investigators and journalists during the early stages of the investigation against Netanyahu. Mandelblit stated that he did not recall being informed about such a connection.
The prosecution, represented by lawyer Keren, objected to the document's presentation and the subsequent questions, citing unfamiliarity with the document from official investigation materials and potential professional privilege issues. Judge Moshe Bar-Am demanded clarification on the privilege claim, leading to a heated legal debate over the admissibility of the conversation's details in court.
After arguments from both sides, the document was displayed, detailing the investigators' outreach to Drucker. It indicated that Drucker had contacted an investigator after previous attempts to reach him. The investigators emphasized the critical importance of email correspondence between Ari Harow and various parties. Drucker reportedly stated he would cooperate more broadly if the Attorney General officially declared the preliminary review a full criminal investigation, but would not transfer materials during the review phase due to fears of exposing his sources.
The document further described the end of the conversation, where Drucker was asked again about correspondence concerning Ari Harow and Yafa Cohen. He identified it as a direct exchange between the two and agreed to send it via WhatsApp, with both sides agreeing to maintain ongoing contact. Mandelblit reiterated his lack of recollection when Haddad pressed him again about the police's separate channel for obtaining materials against Netanyahu through Drucker.
Mentioned
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.