Netanyahu Trial: Mandelblit Faces Sharp Cross-Examination on Investigation Approvals

During cross-examination by defense attorney Amit Haddad, Mandelblit stated he recalled authorizing the questioning of Netanyahu as a suspect for public integrity offenses, but could not remember if he explicitly approved mentioning bribery in the formal warning. Mandelblit acknowledged that Netanyahu was not explicitly warned of bribery suspicions in Case 4000, which he described as a flaw in the wording of the warning. He added that it was possible he misremembered and had authorized the word bribery, but when pressed by the judge, he reiterated that he did not recall doing so.

Haddad argued that the prosecution's documents did not constitute explicit approval to open a bribery investigation, and presented documents to show that the police had investigated bribery suspicions contrary to Mandelblit's position and the law. Haddad further asserted that the indictment was filed to cause a change in government. Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh objected to the defense's line of questioning, arguing that Mandelblit was meant to testify about his approvals rather than be cross-examined on documents submitted later by the prosecution.