Netanyahu Trial Judge Angered by Prosecution's Limits on Testimony

During the ongoing testimony of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit in the Netanyahu trial, a judge expressed frustration with the prosecution's attempt to limit the scope of cross-examination. The prosecution, represented by prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh in Case 4000, sought to restrict questioning to the approvals Mandelblit granted for initiating investigations, warning against venturing into other directions. However, Judge Moshe Bar-Am questioned how the court could ignore Mandelblit's testimony regarding alleged illegal actions.

The cross-examination had focused on actions taken before and during the approval process for investigations. The current dispute centers on whether Mandelblit can be questioned about actions that occurred afterward, some of which he has reportedly described as illegal. Tirosh argued that a district prosecutor also reviews investigation materials and that the Attorney General's office has teams for such checks, asserting that the prosecutor is a body, not a specific individual.

Judge Bar-Am appeared uncomfortable with this stance and wished to question Mandelblit further. Ultimately, in a majority decision, Judge Friedman Feldman stated, "We decided by majority to accept the state's objection." This indicates Bar-Am was in the minority, and his desire to delve deeper into the alleged illegalities was overruled.

The ruling may displease Benjamin Netanyahu's defense attorneys, as it potentially closes the door on questioning Mandelblit about alleged illegal actions in the cases that occurred after the investigation approvals, according to their claims.